Steeles Royal
Toronto Escorts

Climate Alarmists Foiled: No US Warming Since 2005

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
After a 7 hr CNN Town Hall where Bernie Sanders proposed a $16T plan to flight climate change (or is it global warming, my news speak subscription has expired) I find this remarkably under reported.

I’m not a climatologist so I don’t profess to be an expert but this seems to debunk the hysteria.

Climate Alarmists Foiled: No US Warming Since 2005

By James Taylor
August 23, 2019
When American climate alarmists claim to have witnessed the effects of global warming, they must be referring to a time beyond 14 years ago. That is because there has been no warming in the United States since at least 2005, according to updated data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings.

Prior to the USCRN going online, alarmists and skeptics sparred over the accuracy of reported temperature data. With most preexisting temperature stations located in or near urban settings that are subject to false temperature signals and create their own microclimates that change over time, government officials performed many often-controversial adjustments to the raw temperature data. Skeptics of an asserted climate crisis pointed out that most of the reported warming in the United States was non-existent in the raw temperature data, but was added to the record by government officials.

The USCRN has eliminated the need to rely on, and adjust the data from, outdated temperature stations. Strikingly, as shown in the graph below, USCRN temperature stations show no warming since 2005 when the network went online. If anything, U.S. temperatures are now slightly cooler than they were 14 years ago.

Temperature readings from 2005 (far left) to the present (far right) show absolutely no warming.

NOAA USCRN; Watts

Climate activists frequently visit or mention particular regions, states, or places in the United States and claim warming impacts are evident, accelerating, and unmistakable. Yet how can that be when there has been no warming in the United States since at least 2005?

Unfortunately, when politicians and climate activists claim they can see the impacts of climate change in a particular place, the media rarely question them on it and tend to accept the claims at face value. But the objective temperature data show no recent warming has occurred.

There is also good reason to believe U.S. temperatures have not warmed at all since the 1930s. Raw temperature readings at the preexisting stations indicate temperatures are the same now as 80 years ago. All of the asserted U.S. warming since 1930 is the product of the controversial adjustments made to the raw data. Skeptics point out that as the American population has grown, so has the artificial warming signal generated by growing cities, more asphalt, more automobiles, and more machinery.

If anything, the raw temperature readings should be adjusted downward today relative to past temperatures (or past temperatures adjusted upward in comparison to present temperatures) rather than the other way around. If raw temperature readings are the same today as they were 80 years ago, when there were fewer artificial factors spuriously raising temperature readings, then U.S. temperatures today may actually be cooler than they were in the early 20th century.

The lack of warming in the United States during the past 14 years is not too different from satellite-measured global trends. Globally, satellite instruments report temperatures have risen merely 0.15 degrees Celsius since 2005, which is less than half the pace predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate models.

Climate crisis advocates attempt to dismiss the minor satellite-measured warming by utilizing ground temperature stations around the globe, which tend to have even more corrupting biases and problems than the old U.S. stations. Of course, they adjust those readings, as well. Perhaps the time has come for American officials to direct some of the billions of dollars spent each year on climate-research and climate-change programs to building and maintaining a global Climate Reference Network.

Either way, it is becoming increasingly difficult for American politicians and climate activists to say they can see the effects of warming temperatures in the United States. For at least the past 14 years, there have been no such warming temperatures.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Less biased title with a bit more context:

Global Warming or Bad Data?
Garbage in...


JOHN STEELE GORDONSeptember 3, 2019
climate change
+

AA

-

Al Gore likes to say that the science of climate change is “settled.” But of course, science, almost by definition, is never settled.

And climate science has always suffered from the problem of shaky and missing data. Seventy percent of the globe is covered by ocean, where data is hard to collect. Reliable weather records only go back to about 1850 and, in many parts of the world, are far more recent. Modern recording weather stations date only to the early 20th century.

And many of those stations have a big problem. While they haven’t changed appreciably over the years, the land around them has changed, often profoundly, with the great growth in urban and suburban areas. The weather station that was put, say, in the middle of a Nassau County, Long Island, potato field in 1923 is still in the same spot. But the potatoes are long gone, and now it’s behind a strip mall, twenty feet from the kitchen exhaust fan of a Chinese take-out joint.

A study by meteorologist Anthony Watts found that almost 90 percent of the 1221 weather stations in the U.S. did not meet the National Weather Service’s setting standards, which requires that they be at least 100 feet from any artificial heat source or radiating surface. You can see some of the most egregious violators here. To deal with this defective information, climate scientists, have “adjusted” the data to solve this problem. Invariably, these adjustments have made earlier data show lower temperatures, and recent data show higher ones.

To develop reliable data, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) placed 114 state-of-the-art weather stations relatively evenly spaced about the lower 48 states. They were carefully sited to be away from urban areas, which are heat islands, airports, which can be affected by jet exhaust, etc.

The system became operative in 2005. Now, realclearenergy.com is reporting that there has been no increase in average temperatures in the continental United States over the last 14 years, as measured by these new stations. If anything, overall temperatures are slightly cooler than they were.

One big reason for this lack of warming is surely the explosion in U.S. natural gas production, thanks to fracking. The U.S. is now, by far, the number-one producer of natural gas, producing 90 billion cubic feet a day, 25 percent more than second-place Russia. This has brought the price of natural gas to its lowest point in 20 years, which has resulted in a big shift from producing power by burning coal to burning natural gas, which produces 50 percent less carbon dioxide. (The shale gas revolution has vast geopolitical implications, of course, as well as climatic ones.)

As a result, the U.S. CO2 emissions are down to where they were in 1985–a third of a century ago, when the GDP was half what it is now in inflation-adjusted terms, and the population was smaller by a quarter. No other industrialized country has come anywhere close to reducing their emissions by so much.

JOHN STEELE GORDON

John Steele Gordon, a contributor to Commentary’s blog, is the author of An Empire of Wealth.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Looks like the global warming faithful are stunned to silence by facts....
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,094
2,592
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked
PETER JAMES SPIELMANN
June 29, 1989
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

https://apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,978
6,111
113
Looks like the global warming faithful are stunned to silence by facts....
Fortunatly most climate scientisis rely on objkective facts and not Trumian or laternative facts.

Scientific Consensus
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

Click here for a partial list of these public statements and related resources.
The Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.
[QUOTEThe current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.1

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2 Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.3

The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling:
Global Temperature Rise
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months. 5][/QUOTE]

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,289
113
And it seems that Larue's graph of AMERICAN temperatures is a weak attempt to disprove GLOBAL warming.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,750
17,571
113
Looks like bullshit to me.
Easy way to prove it.

Post a link to the chart from the article that's posted directly on the NOAA site.
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
And it seems that Larue's graph of AMERICAN temperatures is a weak attempt to disprove GLOBAL warming.
Do you honestly think the rest of world has been heating up, while America has not for the last 15 years?
Can you please explain the physics behind that?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,750
17,571
113

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
Fortunatly most climate scientisis rely on objkective facts and not Trumian or laternative facts.





[QUOTEThe current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.1

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2 Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.3

The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling:
Global Temperature Rise
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months. 5]
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/[/QUOTE]

Too funny
You state most climate scientist rely on objective facts and follow that up with statement about a consensus of opinion
A opinion is not a fact
I guess you missed the science class where they explained to you that science is not settled by polls or consensus of opinion
Scientific theory is ONLY supported or refuted by empirical & repeatable testing and observation


Here another beauty

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2 Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.
too bad water vapour is the predominate greenhouse gas and CO2 is a trace gas (400 parts per million) with a small contribution

Climate alarmist's have grossly overstated the impact of trace greenhouse gases as water vapour is responsible for 95% of the greenhouse effect
Absorbance of infrared radiation by trace organic compounds including Co2 is, like so many nature phenomimom is logarithmic (ie diminishing returns with each additional quantity)
The 15 micrometer wavelength absorbance of C02 is almost entirely overshadowed by water vapour and the portion which not overshadowed was essentially saturated at 200 ppm (half of todays level)

Any incremental heating from doubling CO2 will be modest at worse , no where near what the IPCC claims.
There are some real serious behaviour issue in climate science and the IPCC is much better at spreading propaganda than conducting science
Their theoretical computer models have consistently overshot the actual temperatures because they have a theoretical run away feedback loop which just is not happening

Learn some physics
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
Yes, you guys should apologize for trying to bait and switch by posting old charts that are discontinued as if they were the recent ones.
From the link:


Oh, and its American weather, not the planetary climate
You are too much
Keep reading after
National USHCN monthly temperature updates have been discontinued. T
The official CONUS temperature record is now based upon nClimDiv.
What does the nClimDiv graph look like?
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-...e_scale=p12&begyear=2004&endyear=2019&month=8
Same flat graph only green
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,750
17,571
113
Do you honestly think the rest of world has been heating up, while America has not for the last 15 years?
Can you please explain the physics behind that?
Larue, google AMOC slowdown, read a few articles and see if you can follow the debate.
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
Water vapour = feedback
CO2 = forcing

That's a stupid, high school level mistake.
Oh boy that is totally incorrect
Ask any climate scientist & they will tell you water vapour is the predominate greenhouse gas by far
It absorbs Infrared radiation to a far greater extent and its concentration is 20-40 times that of Co2

The water vapour feedback lop you mentioned is hypothetical increase in water vapour in the atmosphere alarmists think occurs as temperature increases- too bad they can not model cloud formation or rain.

Each post you continue to embarrass your self- You do not understand this subject at all
Time for you to stop trying to fake science and do what you best- you know Character Assassination & misleading others on social issues
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
When you don't cherry pick the dates, it shows the same warming as elsewhere on the planet.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-...e_scale=p12&begyear=1957&endyear=2019&month=8
Another stunned statement by Franfooter.
the USHCN data has only been collected for the last 15 years, previous records contain the urban heat island effect (Anthony Watts).
NOAA designed USHCN data set to exclude such tainting of data, just in case this global warming theory was not correct
a very responsible approach given what is at stake
The nClimDiv perhaps marries the old tainted data prior to 2004 with the untainted USHCN data afterwards
After all NOAA will need some record prior to 2004
NOAA will of coarse expect the user to THINK when looking at the data

More importantly for the past 15 years man kind has pumped more CO2 into the atmosphere than at any other 15 year period, yet no distinguishable increase in USA land temp (when properly measured)
Cheery picking the period or not man made CO2 aint driving temperature. Case closed

You really do not understand this do you?
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,158
2,151
113
Larue, google AMOC slowdown, read a few articles and see if you can follow the debate.
Oh , so now you are claiming its the oceans which control climate change
That kinda lets man-made CO2 off the hook then

How are you going to tax the ocean?
We must get off of fossil fuels, eat less meat and adopt socialism because the oceans are controlling the climate ?????

what man truly understands about climate is minuscule and certainly not enough to accurately predict it beyond a couple of days
This CO2 farse has set science back by probably 50 years

What is sickening is the hysteria and viciousness used by alarmists in attacking others who were sceptical, careers were destroyed (Roger Pielke, Judith Curry), Industries shut down (Alberta) most of the alarmist like you did not understand the science at all nor did they attempt to learn it
The economic losses resulting from this madness are staggering.

However those revolting behaviors are small when compared to the use of children to push a political agenda.
Think how how many of the worlds poor people have been denied inexpensive energy because of lunatic climate change policies
You have zero integrity
 
Toronto Escorts