The Fifth National Climate Assessment Report is Driven by Government Deception & Climate Alarmist Politics

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

The U.S. Government recently released the Fifth National Climate Assessment report which falsely claims that:

“The climate change signal is “even clearer today than it was five years ago,” Hayhoe said. In the U.S., people across all regions are experiencing hotter temperatures and longer-lasting heat waves, with nighttime and winter temperatures warming the fastest.”

“Anyone who willfully denies the impact of climate change is condemning the American people to a very dangerous future. Impacts are only going to get worse, more frequent, more ferocious and more costly,” Biden said.

Tuesday’s assessment paints a picture of a country warming about 60% faster than the world as a whole, one that regularly gets smacked with costly weather disasters.”

One of the primary exhibits supposedly supporting these flawed alarmist claims contained in the report is shown below which is alleged to represent the U.S. and Global changes in surface temperature anomalies between 1895 to 2023.

As indicated in the text supporting this graph the average temperature anomaly year 1895 to 2023 data for the U.S. is a hodgepodge of CONUS Only data (light blue), then a mix of CONUS + Alaska data (medium blue line beginning in 1926), then a mix of CONUS + Alaska plus Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. Affiliated Islands (dark blue lines beginning in 1951). 

These absurd changes contaminate the extensive NOAA Contiguous U.S. temperature database record by combining  climate region data from geographically isolated areas representing the arctic (with large arctic amplification present in Alaska but not being present in the Contiguous U.S.) and tropical global climate regions all located thousands of miles distant from the Contiguous U.S. (shown below).

This contrived distortion and deception hugely impacts the Contiguous U.S. temperate climate region data outcomes leading to the government reports erroneous claims regarding the climate behavior of the “country”.

The Fifth National Climate Assessment report graph below (with the years between year 1965 and 2023 further highlighted on the right display for better comparison) shows the “All US” graph which results from the ridiculous data hodgepodge created by combining geographically isolated disparate climate regions located thousands of miles away from the Contiguous U.S temperate climate region.

Note that the “All US” trend graph completely crosses the 0-degree temperature anomaly line in about 1985 leading to false claims that the “country” experienced rapidly rising temperatures from that time.

NOAA’s average temperature anomaly data from the actual Contiguous U.S. (absent the contrived hodgepodge of geographically isolated disparate climate region additions) is shown below (with the data from about year 1970 to 2023 highlighted on the right display for better comparison) with the same timeframe (move the slide bar on the NOAA graph to Jan. 1895) as presented in the governments manipulated National Climate report shown above.

Note that the NOAA average temperature anomaly data which is much more detailed than the compressed and poorly defined average temperature anomaly data in the National Climate Assessment report does not cross the 0-degree average temperature anomaly line at all during the period from 1985 to 2023.

This NOAA average temperature anomaly data shown above completely disproves the contrived and illegitimate claims that the “country” is “warming about 60% faster than the world as a whole” and experiencing “hotter temperatures and longer-lasting heat waves”.

These false and flawed claims result from the government forcing a hodgepodge of geographically isolated disparate climate regions (arctic and tropical regions combined with the Contiguous U.S. temperate climate region) into the Contiguous U.S. database and thereby contaminating the Contiguous U.S. climate database to conceal its measured climate behavior.

The manipulation of this climate data in the Fifth National Climate Assessment report brings to mind the use of deception and distortion employed in the “Hide the Decline” fiasco during the “Climategate” period in 2009.      

Furthermore, the NOAA temperature anomaly data record for the Contiguous U.S. for the summer June through August periods (uncontaminated by geographically isolated climate data from the arctic and tropical climate regions) representing the maximumaverage and minimum temperature anomaly data for each yearly summer period since 1895 is readily available and shown below (use Time Scale: 3 Months, Month: August, move the slide bar to Jan 1895 to obtain these graphs).

Note the average temperature anomaly summer period data (middle graph) shows that the most recent years experienced summer temperature anomalies that are no higher than during the “dust bowl” era of the 1930s before the governments climate alarmism propaganda campaign came into existence.  

Additionally, this NOAA temperature anomaly data shows that the Contiguous U.S. average temperature anomaly is being influenced upward not only by the maximum temperature anomaly increases but even more so by the increasing minimum temperature anomaly (steeper slope) outcomes.

This is a clear reflection of Urban Heat Island (UHI) impacts resulting in higher night time minimum temperatures as was demonstrated with data presented by Dr. Roy Spencer from a prior WUWT article.

The same UHI minimum temperature climate impact on the average temperature is also reflected in NOAA absolute temperature data for the Contiguous U.S. as shown below from a prior WUWT article.

The NOAA temperature data for both Contiguous U.S. anomaly temperatures and Contiguous U.S. absolute temperatures are shown below that clearly show average temperature anomaly and absolute temperatures in the Contiguous U.S are being influenced upward in summer periods because of resulting UHI occurring in higher population cities of the U.S over the last 100 years.

The Fifth National Climate Assessment report is a scientifically flawed technical document because of its contrived distortion and deception of climate data as described above with these actions undermining the government’s credibility regarding both its climate science objectivity and competence.        

5 35 votes
Article Rating
65 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 20, 2023 6:31 am

Story tip:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/floating-offshore-wind-turbine

The green IEEE Spectum can always be relied upon to push the latest green scheme, this time it is floating wind turbines:

INSIDE THE GLOBAL RACE TO TAP POTENT OFFSHORE WIND

Here’s why we need wind turbines that float

(Notice the royal “we” here…)

The steadiest, strongest wind blows over deep ocean water. Floating wind turbines are designed to exploit that huge untapped potential.

IN A HANGAR at the University of Edinburgh, a triangular steel contraption sits beside a giant tank of water. Inside the tank, a technician in a yellow dinghy adjusts equipment so that the triangled structure can be hoisted into the water to see how it deals with simulated waves and currents. 

[…]

There’s good reason for this hustle: The United Kingdom wants to add 34 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030, en route to decarbonizing its grid by 2035. But the shallow waters east of London are already packed with wind turbines. Scotland’s deeper waters are therefore the U.K.’s next frontier. Auctions have set aside parcels for 27 floating wind farms, with a combined capacity exceeding 24 GW.

Yeah, there is a lot free money at stake.

They saved the best for last, at the end of the article:

Sustained government support is key

Wait for it…

Sinclair is betting that building, deploying, and maintaining floating wind farms will ultimately dwarf the last century’s oil and gas boom.

Anyone want to take this bet?

Henry Jeffrey, one of Tom Davey’s colleagues at the University of Edinburgh, is a transplant from offshore oil and gas engineering who now codirects the U.K.’s Supergen Offshore Renewable Energy R&D effort. He agrees that governments need to step up. Jeffrey says politicians ask him all the time when floating offshore wind technology will be competitive.

“I say, ‘Well, it’s directly proportional to your political will. It’s up to you to make it happen,’” Jeffrey says. The technology is “as close and credible as government wants it to be.” 

In other words, this “behemoth” waste can’t survive without an endless tap of government tax cash, i.e. other people’s money.

mcsandberg007
Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 7:03 am

Hmmm… I’d say this is evidence that the green nonsense is pretty much over. Shallow water offshore wind consumes roughly 14 times the raw materials of a conventional power plant and floating offshore wind will be much worse!!

Reply to  mcsandberg007
November 20, 2023 7:25 am

Here’s another example of how the Spectrum stays out in front, from Nov. 2014, nine years ago:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/worlds-biggest-dump-truck-goes-electric

World’s Biggest Dump Truck Goes Electric

With four 1200-kW engines, it’s more efficient and can carry a larger payload than ever before

Oh yeah, these things are everywhere today…notice the complete lack of anything about where those 4.8 MW (per truck) come from.

mcsandberg007
Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 7:30 am

Spectrum is entirely written by academics. If they’d gone out into the real world they would have found that Caterpillar went with a mechanical drive in their 400 ton dumps because that means you don’t need an electrician on staff. Yep, the extra trade costs the mine more than the small efficiency gain of a diesel electric drive.

Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 8:35 am

you didn’t read your own link did you –
you didn’t look neither – these things are everywhere (in mines/quarries)

Reply to  Peta of Newark
November 20, 2023 9:22 am

Well, from whence do the 4,800,000 Watts needed for the four motors come?

Rick C
Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 10:18 am

According to the Cat specs it comes from a 3500HP diesel engine.

Reply to  Rick C
November 20, 2023 10:59 am

Yes, but, the second paragraph says:

But it has another claim that makes it even more impressive: an electric drive motor. Electric-powered vehicles have been around to do heavy lifting in mines for years, but those trucks, known as trolley trucks, received their electricity from overhead power lines.

Having an “electric drive motor” is impressive?

Buried down inside paragraph #5:

The AC electric drive is powered by two 16-cylindar-diesel engines that each have an output of about 1,700 kW.

In reality, it is a diesel-electric truck, not all that different from diesel-electric locomotives, which have been around for almost a hundred years.

There is no way such a vehicle will ever be propelled by batteries.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 10:31 am

“The AC electric drive is powered by two 16-cylindar-diesel engines”. On board I assume.

Reply to  mleskovarsocalrrcom
November 20, 2023 10:54 am

Diesel-powered, electric-drive has been around since the 1950s, or before, in train engines.

These things are NOT “electric-powered”, that is a wording LIE.

They are “electric-drive”,

The power comes from the diesel engine…

… sometimes with a small battery in between.

Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2023 11:07 am

Well, I got the date wrong..

In the USA it was in 1925

First Diesel-Electric Locomotive Restored at B&O Museum – Railfan & Railroad Magazine

First passenger diesel-electrics in the US were around the mid 1930s, with The Burlington Zephyr, UP M-10000, New Haven Comet and similar trains.

Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 10:47 am

From the link:

The AC electric drive is powered by two 16-cylindar-diesel engines that each have an output of about 1,700 kW. 

Tells you everything you need to know about mining trucks

Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 6:15 pm

They actually depend on diesel engines for the primary power source! So, they aren’t contributing to the demise of fossil fuels.

Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 3:39 pm

Just a quick reminder that the government is now allowing bids of up to £176/MWh in 2012 money for floating offshore wind: that is over £235/MWh indexed to current levels. The intention is that floating offshore wind should feed hydrogen electrolysers and hydrogen storage, which would see power generated from the stored hydrogen emerge at ~£1,000/MWh.

I assume that the Gods have decided to destroy them, and therefore have made them mad.

ScienceABC123
November 20, 2023 6:45 am

When you politicize “science” you always get something that isn’t science.

Curious George
Reply to  ScienceABC123
November 20, 2023 7:29 am

Maybe it isn’t science, but it is something much better: diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Reply to  Curious George
November 20, 2023 9:24 am

As I recall the push used to be DI, Diversity and Inclusion. Equity was added later.
Why did they change the order? The acronym was too revealing?

Reply to  Gunga Din
November 20, 2023 10:49 am

Maybe they just rolled a dei

Reply to  Gunga Din
November 20, 2023 11:31 am

Often wondered this myself. Obviously, ‘DIE’, although fitting, isn’t the greatest acronym to use if you’re trying to lead people down the road to socialism.

Reply to  Frank from NoVA
November 20, 2023 1:39 pm

Socialism is the government owning the means of production. I don’t think the rich who own most of the mainstream media want that.

Reply to  scvblwxq
November 20, 2023 2:51 pm

Ever read (or watch) Animal Farm?
Whoever, by whatever means, for what ever “cause”, ends up in the “Farmhouse” has no plans to leave it.

November 20, 2023 6:46 am

The U.S. Government recently released the Fifth National Climate Assessment report which falsely claims that:

The federal government lies?

I am shocked…

Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 7:18 am

I’m shocked that anyone might expect actual truth from the Biden regime and their cronies.

William Howard
Reply to  karlomonte
November 20, 2023 7:37 am

And per the government the non-vaccine vaccine is safe and effective

George Daddis
November 20, 2023 7:37 am

That’s without challenging Biden’s absurd assertion that climate extremes are getting worse.
US government data shows hurricanes, floods, wild fires etc. have not gotten worse in either intensity or frequency.
What has risen is insurance payouts for “economic” reasons, not more extreme weather.

November 20, 2023 7:46 am

It is obvious that the Early Twentieth Century was as warm or warmer than today. Charts that demonstrate this fact are in this article.

So the United States has no CO2 problem. It is not any warmer today with more CO2 in the air than it was in the recent past with less CO2 in the air. Therefore, CO2 has had no discerable effect on the temperatures of the United States.

And, it is the case, that every region in the world is similar to the United States in that all of them show written, historic temperatures that demonstrate it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today, for them, too.

So, CO2 is not a problem for them, either, as it has had no discerable effect on their temperatures.

Every serious climate scientist, whether alarmist or skeptic, has seen these temperature charts showing there is nothing unusual going on with our weather today, yet the climate alarmists ignore the facts, and many skeptics ignore them, too.

The climate alarmists ignore the facts because the facts contradict their fearmongering about CO2.

Many skeptics avoid the subject because the roof comes crashing in if you challenge the premise that the computer-generated, global “temperature” record is bogus and has been mannipulated for political purposes, not scientific purposes.

Historic temperature/weather measurements destroy the Human-caused Climate Change narrative. One of the U.S. charts presented in the sidebar of this website shows that it was just as warm in the U.S. in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today. CO2 temperature modulation is nowhere to be found.

This is the Elephant in the Room. The climate alarmists cannot explain the behavior of the U.S. temperature profile because it does not conform to their “hotter an hotter” mantra. It’s not hotter in the United States.

So why are people in the United States trying to reduce CO2 output when it has no bearing on temperatures here? Answer: Ignorance; delusion; greed.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 20, 2023 8:47 am

Why are the people of the United States trying to tackle a (allegedly) global problem? Why are we making sacrifices when other continue with business as usual?

And don’t get me start on the Biden-Kerry concessions to China. We will give China everything they want now in exchange for vague, empty promises from China to do something in the future.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
November 21, 2023 4:35 am

I think the Chicoms bought and paid for Joe Biden. They have given the Bidne family millions of dollars. I suspect this is the reason Biden gives the Chicoms favorable treatment.

Scissor
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 20, 2023 10:23 am

With the boiling oceans, at least the New Englanders can go to the beach an pick up some lobster to eat.

Happy Thanksgiving week for those in the U.S.

Simon
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 20, 2023 1:12 pm

So the United States has no CO2 problem. It is not any warmer today with more CO2 in the air than it was in the recent past with less CO2 in the air.”
Not quite true Tom….comment image

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 1:31 pm

The Earth is in a 2 million-year-plus ice age named the Quaternary Glaciation. In a warmer but still cold interglacial period.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation

About 4.5 million people die from cold-related causes compared to about 500,000 people dying from cold-related causes each year. Cold or cool air causes our blood vessels to constrict causing blood pressure to rise and that causes more strokes and heart attacks during the cooler months worldwide.
‘Global, regional and national burden of mortality associated with nonoptimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study’
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext

Reply to  scvblwxq
November 20, 2023 1:33 pm

Warming with fewer deaths from cold weather is very good, not bad.

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 1:43 pm

You know that is all urban warming and agenda based mal-adjustments, don’t you.

So why the continued lies and misinformation. ?

Raw data looks more like this.

Ncdc_measured.jpg
Simon
Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2023 2:13 pm

You know that is all urban warming and agenda based mal-adjustments, don’t you.’
So how do you explain the fact that the adjustments minimise the warming? Unadjusted data not your friend it seems…
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-data-adjustments-affect-global-temperature-records/#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20over%20the%20full,that%20the%20world%20has%20experienced.

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 5:19 pm

You cite “carbon breifs.”

Therefore, you KNOW it is agenda driven.

They are all about the agenda… !

Are you so dumb that you didn’t realise that !! (no need to answer)

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 5:21 pm

Those “adjustments” are from already manically mal-adjusted never-was-data.

Your lack of understanding and ability to comprehend, means you gullibly fall for every one of their cons/scams.

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 6:29 pm

The appropriate data set to use is any of the depictions of the maximum temperatures in the above article. The average is a statistical construct, and outside of the tropics, the diurnal low is rarely truly hot.

Reply to  Simon
November 21, 2023 4:45 am

Like I said, bogus Hockey Stick charts are all the climate alarmists have.

Simon has seen charts that show it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today and these charts are from all around the world, so why would he believe in a chart, like the bogus Hockey Stick chart, that does not show the Eartly Twentieth Century to be just as warm as today?

And of course, Simon is not alone in this denial of the written, historical temperature records. All climate alarmists deny the historical records. They do so because the evidence blows up the CO2-is-dangerous narrative.

Here are 600 graphs from around the world that show it was just as warm in the Twentieth Century as it is today.

I just don’t understand how some people can ignore all this evidence. But they do. To the detriment of all of us.

https://notrickszone.com/600-non-warming-graphs-1/

Simon
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 20, 2023 1:15 pm

And, it is the case, that every region in the world is similar to the United States in that all of them show written, historic temperatures that demonstrate it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today, for them, too.”
Also not really the reality https://www.climate.gov/media/15021

Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 1:45 pm

It is the reality when you look at raw data that hasn’t been through the agenda-drive AGW “adjustment” mill.

1940s -us temp.png
Reply to  Simon
November 20, 2023 2:01 pm

I have many charts of temperatures from around the world that show that the statement is actually TRUE..

How many will you deliberate ignore this time, so you can remain deliberately ignorant ?

We know nearly ALL NH temps have the 1930s/40s peak (before mal-adjustment)..

but here are a couple for elsewhere..

1940s-South African temps.png
Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2023 2:02 pm

India.. even with urban warming…

Bangalore.jpg
Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2023 2:03 pm

Andes…

Andes-South-America-De-Jong-16.jpg
Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2023 2:07 pm

Portugal…

Portugal grapes.jpg
Reply to  bnice2000
November 21, 2023 4:50 am

Good examples!

I guess Simon gave you a downvote on each chart. I gave you an upvote. 🙂

Who’s the denier now? 🙂

November 20, 2023 7:56 am

Tuesday’s assessment paints a picture of a country warming about 60% faster than the world as a whole, […].

Oh noz! 🙂

Every Place On Earth Warming Faster Than Every Other Place On Earth

John Hultquist
Reply to  Paul Hurley
November 20, 2023 8:44 am

I wonder who wrote the first of these “warming faster” stories.
That person may have been confused, but honestly thought it the truth.
After the first, things just get sillier {“Curiouser and curiouser!”. Cried Alice”}
beyond belief.
[The link to Briggs also has a link to a 3-year-old post of a similar nature.]

Reply to  Paul Hurley
November 20, 2023 5:23 pm

Seeing as the USA has hardly warmed at all since USCRN started (funny about that)…

… and has been cooling quite quickly since the 2015/16 El Nino.

Their statement makes absolutely zero sense.

Reply to  Paul Hurley
November 20, 2023 6:35 pm

I think that this should be called the “Lake Wobegon” effect.

wh
November 20, 2023 8:35 am

“These absurd changes contaminate the extensive NOAA Contiguous U.S. temperature database record by combining climate region data from geographically isolated areas representing the arctic (with large arctic amplification present in Alaska but not being present in the Contiguous U.S.)”

Your observation about incorporating Alaska’s temperature records into those of the contiguous United States is well taken. This creates a misleading portrayal of rapid warming taking place in the contiguous U.S. However, I do have reservations about the reliability of temperature records in Alaska and the surrounding Arctic region, which raises further questions. In May, I delved into the GHCN data in those specific regions and discovered a significant amount of missing data, particularly during the winter months. This gap is understandable given the inhospitable conditions during that time. The issue becomes more pronounced, especially in the era before automated thermometers. Reliable station coverage only became more consistent around 1995, a relatively short period to draw definitive conclusions about the actual conditions in those regions. Recognizing this concern, I reached out to Willie Soon, considering his extensive efforts in unraveling GHCN data over the past four years. He concurred with my assessment that more work needs to be done in this region to ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data.

November 20, 2023 8:43 am

In my experience, no government agency has ever issued an accurate report on anything. Some years ago when I was in business, I made the mistake of buying a few government reports on business conditions related to my industry in various parts of the world. I stopped buying them when I realized I knew more about it than they did, and in fact discovered many complete falsehoods. As C. Northcote Parkinson observed, bureaucracy exists to satisfy itself.

November 20, 2023 8:43 am

‘The Fifth National Climate Assessment Report is Driven by Government Deception & Climate Alarmist Politics”

My first reaction to reading this title is “well, duh.”

November 20, 2023 8:53 am

It’s the National Climate Assessment, a statement of fact by the US government, just as the figures of the US Census Bureau, the Internal Revenue Service or the Center For Disease Control are. It’s official. It’s the truth. There’s no arguing with a government statement of fact. This means that, like it or not, the most unprecedented, expensive and ridiculous task in human history, altering the composition of the world’s atmosphere, is going to be undertaken regardless of the cost and effect on advanced societies and in spite of genuine scientific analysis.

Once the mechanism is set in motion and businesses designed to capture government subsidies have entered the field there will be no return to normality. Even if every rationale for “renewable” energy and elimination of atmospheric carbon eventually is proven to be a fool’s errand, the mechanism, like all government programs will continue to exist at some perhaps smaller level. Wind turbines will continue to be sited and built, solar panels will still be erected and hydrogen pipelines will still be buried across farmland. The US maintains a Selective Service Administration, the budget for which was $24 million in 2012, even though no one has been drafted since 1973. The cost of storing confiscated wildlife trophies would be interesting to know. In a clear violation of common sense it will continue, perhaps as long as the country exists, just as there will always be a program to take advantage of the dubious economics of the wind and solar power now that they’ve been accepted by Uncle Sam.

Reply to  general custer
November 20, 2023 1:47 pm

Bloomberg’s green-energy research team estimated it would cost $US200 Trillion to stop Global Warming by 2050. 

There is only $US40 trillion in cash, checking, and savings in the world.

There are about 2 billion households in the world, so that is $US100,000 per household. 

Ninety percent of the world’s households can’t afford anything additional so the households in developed nations will have to pay 10 times as much to cover it.

That means about $US 1 million per household in developed countries or about $US 35,000 per year for 27 years. The working people can’t afford anything near that, most would prefer to have a million in the bank and a degree or two of warming. 

The millionaires and billionaires have about $US208 billion. That would cover it, but they won’t give up their wealth.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-05/-200-trillion-is-needed-to-stop-global-warming-that-s-a-bargain#xj4y7vzkg

Rud Istvan
November 20, 2023 9:39 am

14 US Agencies received $2.4 billion last year to produce this drivel. Nobody thinks they would say ‘not a problem’—they would lose $2.4 billion. False climate alarm pays well.

November 20, 2023 10:13 am

Fear is the primary tool of governments that fear their citizens knowing the truth.

Reply to  Shoki
November 20, 2023 12:06 pm

Nice! And your are in very good company:

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
-— H.L. Mencken

NCA5 is just the latest is the series spewed forth by the Biden administration and Democratic Party.

November 20, 2023 10:20 am

There was a recent 8+ year pause in global warming (UAH data), apparently ending about four months ago, while over the same time interval atmospheric CO2 levels increased from about 400 ppm to 423 ppm (a 6% increase).
— ref: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/05/the-new-pause-remains-at-8-years-10-months/
and see the attached NOAA/Mauna Loa Observatory graph of atmospheric CO2 levels 

This obvious lack of correlation between these parameters over time falsifies the claim that atmospheric CO2 drives global temperature. Same holds true for previous intervals of pauses and even slight cooling intervals despite atmospheric CO2 concentration continuing to rising:
— a 1880-1913 cooling (a 33-year interval)
— a 1946-1976 cooling (a 30 year interval).

Furthermore, one can see from the attached graph that all reductions in (CO2) emissions that have been made by the US “since peaking in 2007″—this claim made in the NCA5 graphic text in the above article—have not had any perceptible effect on the generally smooth, exponentially-increasing rise of atmospheric CO2 concentration.

The truth is out there . . . for all to see for themselves.

NOAA_CO2_data.jpg
Reply to  ToldYouSo
November 20, 2023 1:49 pm

More animals releasing CO2 and more plants releasing CO2 at night.

Reply to  scvblwxq
November 20, 2023 6:44 pm

Trees also release CO2 from their roots in the Winter.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 21, 2023 6:22 am

Volcanoes release CO2 when they are venting or erupting.

Bob
November 20, 2023 12:35 pm

Very nice Larry. It is so obvious that these dirty CAGW bottom feeders are lying and cheating. I want all of those involved with the Fifth National Climate Assessment Report thrown in jail. This kind of crap is not okay.

Kit P
November 20, 2023 12:41 pm

Being a skeptic, I am skeptical of climate change. Of course I am also skeptical of Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

So I went to the source document. Larry was to kind!

What a load of unadulterated BS.

My expertise is making electricity. If I was concerned about CO2 I would not be building wind, solar, or BEV. Nuke plants are a good solution but rejected for political reasons.

Based on observing politics for the last 30 years, promotion of ineffective solutions has resulted in more coal being burned every year.

Reply to  Kit P
November 20, 2023 1:51 pm

Coal is just old wood that Mother Nature has heated and compressed for easier storage.

November 20, 2023 1:40 pm

Story tip

New Study: Modern Sea Ice Extent Is Nearly The Highest In 9000 Years Across the Arctic (notrickszone.com)

Yet another confirmation that we live in a COOLER period of the Holocene.

And that so-called “climate scientists™” that make claims of low Arctic Sea ice are basically ignorant know-nothings…