Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The L A Times published an Editorial shown below that falsely represented the year 2022 climate outcomes based on their articles science data unsupported climate alarmist propaganda claim that the world is heading toward a climate disaster.
“You can’t say the 2022 climate data coming out is surprising. But it sure is alarming.
U.S. federal agencies last week reported that 2022 was either the fifth or sixth hottest year on record, depending on the accounting method used. The 10 warmest years over the last 143 years have all occurred since 2010. Another study showed the amount of heat being taken up by Earth’s oceans reached another record high last year.”
The Times climate alarmist propaganda editorial fails to present or even discuss relevant measured climate science data that display the most significant year 2022 climate science measured data outcomes.
NOAA’s Climate at a Glance website provides a detailed look for the years 2016 and 2022 of the behavior of global average temperature anomaly as shown below with these results hyped by the L A Times article as “alarming.”
The actual land-based NOAA measured global average temperature anomaly data shows that between the year 2016 when climate alarmist propagandists declared a “climate emergency” and the end of year 2022 the measured global average temperature anomaly declined at a rate of -1.37 Degrees C per century. This embarrassing outcome to climate alarmism political propaganda enthusiasts is concealed by the L A Times from its readers.
Additionally, the Times falsely promotes the flawed and failed politically contrived claim that CO2 emissions are dominant in controlling global temperature behavior and urges the usual alarmist demand that:
“Leaders at all levels of government will need to keep slashing pollution as quickly as possible, or the nation will have no chance of cutting climate-warming emissions in half by 2030, as Biden has pledged under the international Paris climate accord.”
“Earth is already about 2 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than it was in the late 19th century, and we are continually at the precipice of greater suffering and loss.”
“The data highlight the immense disconnect between the symptoms our overheating planet is showing and what we are doing about the problem.”
NOAA’s measured global average temperature anomaly science data shown below (under the Greenhouse Gases section heading) indicates that while global atmospheric CO2 levels continued to climb upward over the last 60+ years (including the “climate emergency” period over the last 7 years between 2016 and 2022) the NOAA measured global average temperature anomaly trend declined at a -1.37 degrees C rate during this interval where the Times says we must “keep slashing pollution as quickly as possible” to avoid “the precipice of greater suffering and loss.”
The UAH satellite measured climate global average temperature anomaly data shown below with measurements from year 1979 more clearly displays the disconnect between the upward climbing global atmospheric CO2 levels and the measured global average temperature anomaly science data which has a declining trend for the period between 2016 and 2022 of -2.2 degrees C per century. Again, the L A Times conceals from the public measured climate science data which is contrary to its contrived climate alarmist propaganda agenda.
Additionally the interval of a zero global average temperature anomaly trend extends back to the mid 2014 time period representing an interval of nearly 8.5 years of no increasing global average temperature anomaly trend.
Data from land based global average temperature anomaly measurement and satellite global average temperature anomaly measurement systems show that during the last 7 years of the declared “climate emergency” the global average temperature anomaly trend is declining at a rate of between -1.37 to -2.2 Degrees C per century with the climate alarmist propaganda driven L A. Times concealing these climate science measured data outcomes from the public.
Furthermore, this measured science data shows that there has been no increasing global average temperature anomaly increasing trend for nearly the last 8.5 years during the climate alarmist hyped “claim emergency” period.
NOAA also has measured average temperature anomaly data for the contiguous U.S. from its USCRN network of specially sited temperature measurement stations (stations that meet NOAA standards for siting to preclude spurious heat sources from impacting measured data) that represent the most accurate U.S. temperature anomaly measurement system data that went into operation in 2005. This U.S. average temperature anomaly data is shown below which shows the contiguous U.S. is not experiencing increasing temperature anomaly trend outcomes during this period as hyped in the L A Times editorial.
The L A Times further noted comments about the Earth’s oceans as shown below.
“Even more unrelenting is the data from Earth’s oceans, which are bearing most of the load of humanity’s production of greenhouse gas pollution by absorbing more than 90% of the warming. Ocean heat, which fluctuates less than air temperatures, has set a consecutive string of records. The rise in ocean temperatures has accelerated since about 1990 and “is so steady and robust that annual records continue to be set with each new year,”
The most accurate and complete measurement for Ocean depths temperature data is obtained by use of the fleet of robotic instruments that drift with the ocean currents and move up and down between the surface and mid-water level that began operation about the year 2000. This system called the Argo system measures data over the ocean depths from about 1900 meters depth to the top 100 meters with that data at various depths shown below (under the Oceans section heading) from about year 2004.
As noted in the summary statement below (under the Home section heading) the outcome of these measurements relative to ocean temperatures is as follows:
“Since 2004 the global oceans above 1900 m depth on average have warmed about 0.07 degrees C. The maximum warming (about 0.2 degrees C 0 -100 m depth) mainly affects oceans near the Equator, where the incoming solar radiation is at maximum.” This measured 0.07 degrees C global ocean temperature increase over the period from 2004 to 2020 is what the L A Times editorial ridiculously characterizes as “unrelenting” ocean warming.
The L A Times fails to provide the public with important scientifically measured global average temperature anomaly data or significant measured temperature data for the global oceans obtained from the Argo system.
Also completely missing and concealed from the Times flawed climate alarmist editorial is the fact that year 2022 was a debacle of failed claims that hurricanes would occur at above “normal” levels as addressed in the article shown below.
The Times editorial also failed to address the below average occurrence of U.S. tornadoes during year 2022 as shown below from NOAA’s website which also shows that during the 18 year period displayed 13 of the years were below average with only two outlier above average years that occurred 12 to 15 years ago.
The Times claimed that “data highlight the immense disconnect between the symptoms our overheating planet is showing and what we are doing about the problem” but presented no data and in fact concealed highly relevant climate science measured data from public view in its editorial with that hidden data unsupportive of its climate alarmist propaganda distortions and deceptions.
“If that is any indication of what’s to come, House Republicans will try to obstruct climate action instead of acting to protect the American people from an existential threat that’s growing worse by the year. That means state and local efforts to cut emissions will be more important than ever, just as they were during the Trump presidency.”
Hopefully the Republican House can preclude the implementation of the massively costly and completely unnecessary politically contrived climate alarmism schemes hyped by the Democrats and the L A Times with their climate alarmist claims unsupported by climate science measured data that is concealed from the public.
I notice the guff in the LA Times says:
i.e. they’ve just admitted that they’ve been crying wolf for decades and the wolf has failed to appear every time.
They are weapons grade idiots.
…or weapons grade propagandists.
or as Lenin described – “Useful Idiots” – amazing how many so called “smart” people have fallen for this hoax
“amazing how many so called “smart” people have fallen for this hoax”
Yes, it is amazing. It tells us even smart people are easily misled if the propaganda is effective.
“This embarrassing outcome to climate alarmism political propaganda enthusiasts is concealed by the L A Times from its readers.”
And thus the narrative is maintained. And that’s what really counts.
No, he shouldn’t be expecting facts out of the LA Times. They are just another Leftwing propaganda organ, doing their job.
Good job pointing out the failures of the media to publish all the facts. The entire climate scam is built on half truths. Even the claimed forcing by doubling CO2 only looks at a subset of the atmospheric processes moving energy to space.
As a result, the entire paradigm of the greenhouse effect is wrong. While GHGs are part of the reason the lower atmosphere is warmer, it is not in the way climate science assumes. Their problem stems from thinking radiation models can be used without considering what else is going on in the atmosphere. This is what leads to the initial wrong CS for CO2 of 1.1 C. The real number is zero.
What really happens is the lower atmosphere is warmed by radiation, conduction and latent heat. That energy then moves upward as a series of absorption/reemission pairs and physical movement of energetic molecules. It’s a complex process and ignoring major components is always going to get the wrong answer. When all processes are considered together, the claimed warming effect disappears.
Miskolczi discovered this in his 2007, 2010, 2014 papers based on NOAA historic data. He analyzed the results of the energy movement (temperatures at all altitudes) and found there was no trend in the atmospheric handling of energy for 70 years.
Why doesn’t increasing CO2 produce warming as radiation models show? It is due to the fact energy is converted to kinetic energy of molecules and back to radiation over and over again on its trip to space. While in kinetic energy form energy can be moved upward by both convection and conduction. Latent heat also moves upward outside the view of radiation events. Radiation models can’t see this movement. All they consider are radiation events. You’d need a full atmospheric model to get the right answer. As far as I know, there are none. Probably would take centuries to run one if it did exist.
The bottom line. We need climate science and the media to start telling the complete story. Of course, that means there is no climate crisis and moreover there can’t be one based on CO2 emissions.
The modern media is all about protecting the left wing narrative.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/angry-bitter-michigan-school-board-member-claims-whiteness-evil-faces-backlash-divisive-tweets
The same people who have no problem with this woman, want former coach Dungee to be fired from his on air analyst position because he attended a pro-life rally.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/tony-dungy-attend-march-life-dubbed-right-wing-extremist
Mark, if you were a journalist, which would you prefer? Big government, in which case you could travel to exciting places and rub elbows with the elites or small government, in which case you’d be standing on a snow drift in Buffalo with a yardstick prepping for your appearance on the 11pm news?
LA Times is flawed climate howling
But this article is equally flawed climate realism
The first serious problem is data mining 2016 to 2022 — just 6 years
that was a flat trend cherry picked after the 1975 to 2015 warming trend
It started with a hot year 2016 from an El Nino with the hottest temperature in February 2016 since a similar El Nino peak in April 1998.
The USCRN chart is very useful since LA Times treaders most likely live in the US
The article must explain that ALL temperature measurements are DURING a rising trend, so every decade should be expected to be a “record decade” until the warming trend ends. Every warming trend in history ended. And by the way — there’s been no global warming in the past 8 years with the fastest CO2 rise in history — are you curious why the mass media won’t report that?
What’s missing from this article, that would be useful for people who want to learn climate history, are a few basic facts that hopefully everyone here already knows:
The climate is always changing
It’s always warming or cooling
No trend has ever been permanent
People like warming much better than cooling
The correlation of CO2 and global average temperature has changed three times since 1940 (1940 to 1975 negative correlation, 1975 to 2015 positive correlation and 2015 to 2023 no correlation)
The current climate for our planet is the best climate in 5,000 years — it was slightly warmer 5000 to 9000 years ago)
Improving the current climate will require more CO2 in the atmosphere to boost plant growth and more warming in the same pattern as there was from 1975 to 2015 (such as warmer winter nights in Siberia)
We should be celebrating the current climate, which is more pleasant than in the colder 1970s,
And there are better weather conditions for the US with global warming too:
COMING CLIMATE CHANGE CRISIS PROPAGANDA IS SO EFFECTIVE THAT IT PREVENTS MOST PEOPLE FROM ENJOYING TODAY’S WONDERFUL CLIMATE.
U.S. HURRICANES MAKING LANDFALL HAVE BEEN IN A DOWNTREND SINCE THE LATE 1800s.
MAJOR US TORNADOES HAVE BEEN IN A DOWNTREND SINCE THE 1950s.
US HEAT WAVES, DROUGHTS AND FOREST FIRE ACRES BURNED PEAKED IN THE 1930s.
THE 1930s STILL HAVE THE MOST US STATE MAXIMUM HEAT RECORDS OF ANY DECADE, BY FAR.
The CO2 contribution to biomass is highly positive for the climate but then you appear to think that CO2 has bearing on Earth’s energy balance. It doesn’t.
Earth’s energy balance is a function of sunlight and the thermal response, which is dominated by the formation of ice on land, in the oceans and in the atmosphere. These powerful temperature controlled processes counter influences from all other sources.
An example – The extent of snow across the northern hemisphere is trending upward.
This is opposite to what climate models predicted.
Snow has very high albedo compared with surface biomass or rock. So if climate models get the snow extent wrong then they have the surface albedo wrong for the period the snow sits around. This is just one simple illustration of how ice influences the energy balance.
Even the energy that finds its way into the ocean abyss over hundreds of years starts it journey at the boundary of sea ice formation due to thermohaline forcing. The energy that went in from the Southern Ocean 1500 years ago is still working its way through the climate system.
The abyssal regions of the Arctic Ocean are undergoing substantial changes as the Arctic sea ice trends downward due to rising peak solar intensity in the northern latitudes.
Look for ice in the climate and you find energy control mechanisms due to its ability to dramatically alter albedo and numerous other energy intensive processes. The idea that feeble gasses do anything is ridiculous.
I am in favor of more CO2 and more global warming I did not blame the warming on CO2 although I believe there is strong evidence more CO2 is one cause of the 1975 to 2015 warming trend.
Your presentation of one snowfall chart of three is deliberate disinformation. There are three Rutgers Snow lab charts for Fall, Winter and Spring snowfall in the NH. The last time I added them up, the total NH snowfall had a roughly flat trend since 1967
Your presentation of only one of the three Rutgers Snow charts is misleading misinformation — cherry picked to show a rising snowfall trend. Shame on you for lying.
“The idea that feeble gasses do anything is ridiculous.”
Your claim is ridiculous, and easily disproven with science.
That FALSE claim makes you sound ridiculous.
“I am in favor of more CO2 and more global warming I did not blame the warming on CO2 although I believe there is strong evidence more CO2 is one cause of the 1975 to 2015 warming trend.”
Strong evidence? I would like to hear it.
I’m sure the LA Times will report that today at Davos/WEF, it was stated that a billion people need to stop eating meat, in order to save the planet. I have a family barbecue (asado in Argentina) planned for Sunday, I will eat some extra meat to offset the idiots that actually follow this advice. OK, Disclaimer: I will only eat extra meat to justify another glass of Malbec wine.
Lamb was always the carne of choice in Southern Chile.
Great article. Very thorough.
There has been quite a show going on, at Twitter, about the fact that NOAA will show you a declining trend over the last 8 years at their web page for the global temperature anomaly. One need not be making any particular claims about this reported trend as to cause and effect, to see that attribution of the longer reported warming trend to greenhouse gases is sketchy at best.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/ann/1/1940-2022?trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=2015&endtrendyear=2022
Relative to the topic at hand, 100 years is short time.
““Even more unrelenting is the data from Earth’s oceans, which are bearing most of the load of humanity’s production of greenhouse gas pollution by absorbing more than 90% of the warming. Ocean heat, which fluctuates less than air temperatures, has set a consecutive string of records. The rise in ocean temperatures has accelerated since about 1990 and “is so steady and robust that annual records continue to be set with each new year,””
Note to the LA Times, the atmosphere receives ocean warmth that is resupplied by sunlight, as lower troposphere temperature lags sea surface temperature by two months.
Meanwhile the ocean gets its warmth not from the atmosphere but from absorbed solar radiation, particularly in the southern ocean when the sub-solar point TSI is high, like it is now.
Solar absorption to depth under high solar cycle TSI is plainly evident in Rathore etal Figure 1.
My SORCE TSI overlay situated below their (a) NH and (b) SH OHC for 2005-2015 indicates in (b) the southern ocean cooled when SORCE TSI was below my decadal sun-ocean warming threshold, then warmed to depth under rising TSI and high TSI above the decadal threshold.
Since 2012 is an analog year in solar activity for 2023, as we’ve returned again to high TSI deep ocean absorption, when higher TSI sunlight converts into sensible heat which upwells, causing the sea surface temperature to rise, similar to the 2011-2016 years during the last solar cycle.
The post ’90s ocean temp rise resulted from solar cycles higher than my sun-ocean threshold. This solar cycle is set to again naturally drive temperature above the 1.5C ‘limit’ in a short-term El Nino spike such as in 2016, after the ocean accumulates solar energy above the threshold.
Have you ever wondered why this is so?
And it is noteworthy that ocean surface temperature lags sunlight by two months and land surface air temperature only lags by one month.
Thermal inertia
“The post ’90s ocean temp rise resulted from solar cycles higher than my sun-ocean threshold”
There is virtually no satellite measured change of TOA solar energy so your statement is wrong.
“…is concealed by the L A Times from its readers.”
They might not be evil as you imply. It could be that they are simply ignorant of the appropriate facts because they are uneducated in climate-related science or simply too lazy to look. We are dealing with journalists after all who work to time imperatives not accuracy imperatives.
Perhaps it would be appropriate to inform the journalists involved that the oceans are heated by visible light from the sun and whatever comes from the earth beneath. Energy returned to the earth’s surface by so-called greenhouse gasses cannot heat the ocean because the energy is in the form of infrared radiation which does not penetrate more that a tiny bit into the ocean surface leading to compensating evaporation at no change in temperature, not heating. If the increasing ocean temperature data are actually correct and not a consequence of faulty measurement techniques (highly likely in my view) and if the energy output of the sun is in fact constant, then the increases are likely do to alterations in internal ocean currents, release of internal earth heat by geologic processes, or both.
They might also benefit from information concerning the the intrinsic nature of temperature measurements. Because temperature is an intrinsic parameter, relating only to the specific point of measurement and a specific time it is inappropriate to average temperature data sets unless backed by a complete analysis showing that the results are indeed correct or the errors are so small as to be ignorable for the bulk fluid. But that’s another topic entirely.
Ignorance is no excuse for being evil.
Tell us how that permanent drought is hurting California.
The LA Times is coming from one of the left coastal states, each of which has serious non-weather problems. The politicians need to recognize (they won’t) that CO2 is not harmful and not causing the weather. Newspapers and visual media ought to be explaining weather related and other issues and noting the failure of the governments to respond.
The Climate™ won’t notice.
In other words, the L.A. Times is full of deliberate misinformation. But that’s been true for years. They do not have professional, competent, objective journalists … they have a bunch of always-immature journalism-school graduates.
If you can’t do, teach.
If you can’t teach, go into journalism.
If you can’t do, teach or write, become Democrat President Jumpin’ Joe Bidet, Democrat VP Kamala “word salad queen” Harris or Democrat Senator Flusteredman
All the data is so new, and so relatively short term. If one believes Earth > 1M years old and Earth has climate cycles lasting > 100 years then looking at data spanning < 1000 years is uninformative,
I’d love to see the temperatures graphed with the zero K as the low point on the scale. We could see just how big the temperature “anomaly” is or has been.
Graphs like that have been provided on this and other skeptic sites. Basically, it’s a flat line.
See the chart at the link below:
Honest global warming chart Blog: Global warming in absolute Kelvin degrees — get your magnifying glass out ! (elonionbloggle.blogspot.com)
From the article: “U.S. federal agencies last week reported that 2022 was either the fifth or sixth hottest year on record, depending on the accounting method used. The 10 warmest years over the last 143 years have all occurred since 2010.”
That’s a lie, created by Temperature Data Mannipulators at NASA and NOAA who have bastardized the surface temperature record for political/selfish purposes to promote the idea that the Earth’s climate is getting hotter and hotter and hotter and it’s all because of CO2. The truth is the Earth’s climate is not getting hotter and hotter and hotter. It is currently cooling and is 0.5C cooler than 2016.
Here’s the UAH satellite chart (the only legitimate temperature record we have). See how many years can be called the “10 warmest years” between 1998 and 2016. The fact is that not one of those years is warmer than 1998 according to the satellite record. NASA and NOAA are lying to us about the temperature record.
From the article: “NOAA predicts above-normal 2022 Atlantic Hurricane Season”
NOAA always predicts an above-normal hurricane season. That’s part of the “hotter and hotter” ideology.
After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, NOAA predicted above-normal hurricane seasons every year after that, yet no major hurricanes (Cat 3, 4, or 5) hit the U.S. for the next 12 years.
And NOAA is still at it predicting above-normal hurricane seasons. It’s a knee-jerk claim based on climate change religion.
Don’t bet any money on NOAA predictions.
I’m going to have to borrow this graphic:
This graphic shows the real story. CO2 is increasing, yet the temperatures are cooling. That’s just the opposite of what the climate alarmists say should be happening under these circumstances. So, they are wrong.
I see an overall upward trend, with a downward trend since 2016. As suggested above, we need to be looking over much longer time periods, without homogenized data.
The current cooling may be short-lived, or it may not. We know the CO2 levels are going to increase, so the question is will the temperatures increase, too.
Nobody knows the answer. That includes Exxon.
Yes Tom, I copied it too for my current review of climate science, that I’de like to send to the IPA to help its climate campaign against consensus science. This graph clearly shows the general disconnect between CO2 trends and global temperatures, the antithesis of AGW theory. Of course, the whole AGW bandwagon really took off during the coincident positive trends from 1985-1998, but when the Pause hit, the party was over, and the slower warming this century whilst CO2 ramped up, has virtually killed AGW. No wonder the alarmists look to NOAA ground temperatures for reassurance, but UAH is king!.
UAH *is* King! 🙂
From the article: “LA Times: ““If that is any indication of what’s to come, House Republicans will try to obstruct climate action”
Let’s hope so but I have my doubts. I don’t see any Human-caused Climate Change skeptics among the current crop of Republicans. Not one of them that I know of has challenged the basic premise that CO2 is going to overheat the world. That makes it difficult for them to oppose windmills and solar. Instead, they will focus their efforts on reducing costs, not challenging the premise.
The truth is the premise is bogus and the spending on it is totally unnecessary. Why spend money on a figment of the imagination? But the Republicans won’t put it like that. The whole Alarmist Community would come down on their heads if they did.
Our best hope of deciding the matter is a decade or two of cooling while CO2 increases. We may be at the beginning of such a phase.
I hate cold weather but I hate lying climate scientists more. I’ll put up with some cooler weather (not that I have the choice) if it would show these charlatans and dupes to be wrong.
The Climate Change Charlatans use a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick global temperature chart to make their case that CO2 is overheating the world, but a couple of decades of cooling would destroy their case.
Unfortunately, our societies don’t have a couple of decades to decide which course of action to take, or no action, but the politicians are going full steam ahead with trying to kill the fossil fuel industry without any evidence that CO2 is a problem, and in the process they are causig prices for energy to rise and bankrupting companies that depend on the energy.
Mass Hysteria by the Ruling Class.
But will civilizatyion be able to reverse all the damage done over the next several decades in the name of saving the world from Climate Change?
That’s the question. I guess it depends on how much damage is done. I think most of the economic damage is going to happen within this decade if we don’t change course and stop demonizing CO2.
Companies are already moving their operations to China and other nations that do not restrict electricity, and the electric bills of everyone in the Western world are going higher because of this unwarranted effort to curb CO2, and this will just continue as long as there is a war on coal, natural gas and oil.
Our politicians are doing all the wrong things and don’t seem to be able to change course or even want to change course.
Can the Argo system really measure temperatures, repeatably, to 2 decimal places. Are they sufficiently accurate to measure a difference of 0.07C over the period 2004 – 2020?
I had the same question.
I think the ARGO system is pretty accurate, but I don’t know if it is that accurate.