2016 was to be the point of no return. Now, 3 years after 2016, the new date for cosmic doom is "12 years." BTW, it has been "12 years" for the past three years. Go figure.

ELEVEN YEARS AGO TODAY.

On December 13, 2008, junk scientist Al Gore predicted the North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free in five years.

Gore made the prediction to a German audience on December 13, 2008. Al warned them that “the entire North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years.”


video:

Former Vice President Al Gore references computer modeling to suggest that the north polar ice cap may lose virtually all of its ice within the next seven years. “Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” said Gore.

In January 2006, Al Gore pushed the theory that “within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return” and “a true planetary emergency” due to global warming.

Evidence proving regional warming while dening "global" as an aspect of any warming trends.

Editor:  Understand that "tide rise" is a critical element of Global Warming   . . .  no warming = no tide rise.   With that fact in mind,  you should know that no one is moving the financial districts off Manhattan Island.  Resort and investment properties are still selling on the Coastlines of all our major cities.  No one is moving from "ground zero" in the Orient,  Hawaii, Guam, Portia Rico, or any of our major island communities.  the shore line at the Panama Canal , opened in August of 1914, is the same,  today,  105 years later ! Anyone remember Katrina?  That was 2005.  The next year was to be the beginning of the demonstrative warming cerise , scientists predicting as many a 15 Cat 5 hurricanes in the Gulf.  At most, only one Cat % has been the case since Katrina.  Several years ago,  there were headlines pushing the heat wive in Spain   . . .  "proof of global warming."  But France and Portugal had normal temps at the same time   . . . .  so how is this an proof of "global warming" when the example (Spain versus Portugal) only proves a regional circumstance that is "here today and gone tomorrow?"

Understand that the real danger to our world is a massive global cooling,  as was the case just 12,000 years ago, a cooling/freezing time  that covered all of existing Canada and extended in a come shaped fashion from the Northern Border into Texas.

Discouraging if you are a warming alarmist

• China, the world’s largest carbon emitter, increased the electricity generated by burning coal last year and is working to bring a large number of additional coal plants online, according to a new report.
• “An increase in China’s coal power capacity is not compatible with the Paris Climate Agreement to hold warming well below 2 °C,” wrote the report’s authors.
• At the same time, global investment in renewable energy fell.

Source:  The Hill 

I don't know if the reader gets the Paris goal,  but the 160 plus nations involved are committed to reducing future warming projections  to a number that equals the projected high minus 2 degrees celcius  . . . . .  100 years from now.  

Rising tides sink all ships? Or, only those on foreign shorelines?

Before reading the following,  keep these questions in mind.

1.  How many decades does it take to move 150 million people into new homes,  new jobs, with new food supply lines?

2.  How many decades does ittake to move and establish new business clusters?  

3.Why is Thailand  effected but not Hawaii ,  both bordered by the same ocean.

4. And why is Hawaii not in the process of moving its buisness and residential districts to either higher ground or to the Mainland? 

5. If tide rise is presently occurring,  why has the shoreline at the Statue of Liberty remained the same for decades?

6.  If tide rise will inundate much of Egypt,  why is Manhatten Island's business district not affected,  since both geo centers are surrounded or bordered by the same Atlantic Ocean circumstance?  

7.  In 2005,  it was predicted that the Twin Towers Memorial Site would be under 20 ft of ocean water by 2015?  

8.  Why are not all coastal regions of the world not preparing for critical tide rise?  

Rising Seas Will Erase More Cities by 2050, New Research Shows

By Denise Lu and Christopher FlavelleOct. 29, 2019

Rising seas could affect three times more people by 2050 than previously thought, according to new research, threatening to all but erase some of the world’s great coastal cities.

The authors of a paper published Tuesday developed a more accurate way of calculating land elevation based on satellite readings, a standard way of estimating the effects of sea level rise over large areas, and found that the previous numbers were far too optimistic. The new research shows that some 150 million people are now living on land that will be below the high-tide line by midcentury. 

More than 20 million people in Vietnam, almost one-quarter of the population, live on land that will be inundated.

Much of Ho Chi Minh City, the nation’s economic center, would disappear with it, according to the research, which was produced by Climate Central, a science organization based in New Jersey, and published in the journal Nature Communications. The projections don’t account for future population growth or land lost to coastal erosion. 

Standard elevation measurements using satellites struggle to differentiate the true ground level from the tops of trees or buildings, said Scott A. Kulp, a researcher at Climate Central and one of the paper’s authors. So he and Benjamin Strauss, Climate Central’s chief executive, used artificial intelligence to determine the error rate and correct for it.

In Thailand, more than 10 percent of citizens now live on land that is likely to be inundated by 2050, compared with just 1 percent according to the earlier technique. The political and commercial capital, Bangkok, is particularly imperiled.

Climate change will put pressure on cities in multiple ways, said Loretta Hieber Girardet, a Bangkok resident and United Nations disaster risk-reduction official. Even as global warming floods more places, it will also push poor farmers off the land to seek work in cities.

The disappearance of cultural heritage could bring its own kind of devastation. Alexandria, Egypt, founded by Alexander the Great around 330 B.C., could be lost to rising waters.

In other places, the migration caused by rising seas could trigger or exacerbate regional conflicts.

Basra, the second-largest city in Iraq, could be mostly underwater by 2050. If that happens, the effects could be felt well beyond Iraq’s borders, according to John Castellaw, a retired Marine Corps lieutenant general who was chief of staff for United States Central Command during the Iraq War. 

Source fr above text:  NY Times, here.

If you are a Global Climate Alarmist, you probably don't know where "climate killing CO2" comes from, but, for the most part it is not generated by humans.You should read this scientific brief:

Carbon dioxide is generated through the oxidation of carbon or carbon compounds, including combustion and cellular respiration. Carbon dioxide is also released into the atmosphere when water thaws, as well as during volcanic eruptions. While many fear its theorized effects on global temperatures, carbon dioxide is absolutely essential to the vast majority of life on Earth.
The vast majority of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere each year comes from natural sources. Animals and microbes together release about the same amount of carbon dioxide as plants, while the oceans are the greatest single source. Only about 4 percent of carbon dioxide emissions come from artificial human sources. Carbon dioxide currently constitutes about 0.03 percent of Earth's atmosphere.
Carbon dioxide is one of the crucial inputs for producers at the base of almost every food chain. The basic mechanism of photosynthesis is the use of solar energy to bond water and carbon dioxide into carbohydrates. Plants grow faster at higher carbon dioxide levels, since most of their structures are built from carbohydrates. Carbon dioxide is toxic to humans at higher concentrations,but normal atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, even with any conceivable increase due to human activity, are far too low to risk toxicity.

Source for the above text:    https://www.reference.com/science/carbon-dioxide-come-85f591a4711a3b97

Bad news for the global warming cabal (see the story brief below).

Unfortunately for the unhinged global warming religionists the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) debunked the claims that hurricanes are becoming more frequent due to CO2-caused global warming.

The NOAA reported, via American Thinker.

“it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity.”

Gore wrong on climate change twice

In his movie,  Inconvenient Truth,  Gore predicted the foundations for the Twin Tower Memorial would be under 20 feet of ocean water by 2015.  Sunday (Dec 13) was the 7th year anniversary,  as we remember Gore's prediction that the North Pole would be ice free in five years.  It is the end of another hapless hurricane season.  Ten years ago,  we remember Katrina (2005).  What the Left wants us to forget is that the disaster opened the door for end of the world predictions of mammoth storms, larger and with higher winds than at any time in human history. Laughable and in total denial of anything we might call "scientific." 

Climate Hustle, first of its kinds, is a new movie destined to be a classic in the Warming debate. Here are some details of its release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                      CONTACT: Christina Norman (651) 724-4228; cwilson@cfact.org
Skeptical Climate Documentary Set to Rock Climate Debate
President Obama & World Leaders to Be Greeted By New Film Debuting in Paris
Gala Paris red carpet premiere for new “Climate Hustle” skeptical documentary
Cinéma du Panthéon, December 7, 7:30 PM
(Sorbonne, Paris) CFACT will hold the world premiere of its long-awaited Climate Hustle skeptical documentary film at an invitation-only red carpet event in Paris during the UN’s COP 21 international summit on climate change.
Featuring interviews and comments from more than 30 renowned scientists and climate experts, Climate Hustle lays out compelling evidence that devastates the global warming scare.  Film host Marc Morano, founder and publisher of CFACT’s award-winning Climate Depot news and information service, leads viewers on a fact-finding and often times hilarious journey through the propaganda-laced world of “climate change” claims.

The film is the first climate documentary to profile scientists who have reversed their views from supporting the so-called “consensus” position to a conversion to skepticism. The film also profiles politically left scientists who have now declared themselves skeptics of man-made global warming.
David Rothbard, CFACT president and executive producer of the film says, “Climate Hustle is the most important climate documentary since Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.  Gore’s film kicked off a decade of scaremongering junk science.  CFACT’s film debunks the scare and clears the way for a return to sound science and rational debate.”
Nationally syndicated columnist Cal Thomas calls Climate Hustle “tremendous” and says “anyone who still believes in ‘climate change’ after watching this film needs the type of reprogramming given to cult members.”

Noted climatologist Dr. Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, who is featured in the film, adds “Climate Hustle is a refreshing and entertaining antidote to the sillier and alarming claims about climate change and its impacts that people regularly hear from politicians and the media.”
“Climate Hustle” will premiere at the Cinéma du Panthéon, beside the Sorbonne, on Monday, December 7. A red-carpet ceremony and champagne reception will take place at 7:30 p.m. prior to the screening. The film is planned for theatrical and home video release in 2016.
Because of very limited space, credentialed media that wish to attend the event should RSVP in advance to Christina Norman of CFACT (cwilson@cfact.org or phone (651) 724-4228).   Climate Hustle’s host, Marc Morano, along with key scientists from the film, will be available for a short time on the red carpet prior to the event at 7 p.m. and are also available for interviews and comments upon request.
Climate Hustle, a production of CFACT, was fully funded by the support of roughly 1,500 citizen supporters.   More information is available at www.ClimateHustle.com/press

Text above from Climate Depot, here.  

How bad is this supposed "global warming?" One degree Celsius since 1760 and the beginning of the industrial revolution.

2015 is on course for being the warmest year on record. The current average global temperature is around 15C, 1C warmer than before the industrial revolution.  (sky.com)

How bad is this supposed "global warming?"  One degree Celsius since 1760 and the beginning of the industrial revolution.  That's one lousy degree in 250 years. 

But the Left will continue to scream "The sky is falling,  the sky is falling  !!!!!"  

Did you know that weather scientists are prediction a 10 year mini-cold age because of a quiet spell with our Sun?  

Its all cool,  folks.  Its all cool.  

NASA caught cooking books on global data ala data /email scandal in the last decade.

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.
According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own data sets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed.

Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend:

Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.

But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen (pictured above), later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.

The most commonly used ones were:
• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.

Go to Breitbart for the remainder of this article and associated charts ~  editor. 

__________________________________

Understand that "climate-gate" was a 13 year scandal involving scientists dealing with problematic data that could be "misused or misinterpreted"  by global warming opposition.  Much of this discussion was done via emails (more than 1,000 emails).   The scandal was revealed in 2009.  Scientists began concerned about how their data would be "misused" as early as 1996..  

If you read "fact check" defenses (here, for an example)   of these scientists, note the tentative nature of the article and know that that "fact check" articles are part of the partisan debate produced by the global warming cabal under the guise of "objective analysis."  Never ever forget that the Left lies for the sake of the greater good,  believing that if they are on the correct side of the "truth,"  lying may be necessary to defined that truth.  Seriously,  that is what they believe and such as been documented a number of times,  here, on the pages of the Midknight Review

Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia, the ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Climatic_Research_Unit_email_con...

Wikipedia

Independent Climate Change Email Review (UK) ... The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained ...... He said it was not a single scandal, but "a sustained and coordinated campaign" aimed at ...

‎Timeline of the initial incident - ‎Content of the documents

Proof against warming? Anyone still believe the oceans are rising? Shouldn't the Stature of Liberty be under water, by now?

1929 shoreline of the Statue

2011 shoreline of the Statue

Midknight Review has long objected to global warming commentary coming from the ranks of federal agencies and the military. Why? We all know of the crude thuggishness of Obama when "crossed" by his own members. Now, we have confimation of our suspicions:

Daily Caller:

There are government scientists and researchers who are skeptical of man-made global warming — they just won’t speak up about it, according to two seasoned climate scientists.
“There are skeptics in NASA and NOAA, a good number. But they are quiet. They know in this administration, they don’t speak out,” John Christy, a veteran climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, told AL.com.
“These guys in government are not unbiased and they have pressures from above,” echoed Roy Spencer, also a climate scientist at UAH. “Those organizations, NASA and NOAA, they are part of the executive branch. So the White House has some influence over what direction they go. The heads are political appointees so you have political influence from the top down on scientists. And that’s a problem.”
Christy and Spencer sat down with AL.com to discuss their 25 years of using satellites to measure global temperatures, a method of monitoring the climate the two scientists pioneered more than two decades ago.
Satellite temperature measures have been crucial to the global warming debate, showing that temperatures have not risen nearly as fast as most climate models predicted. Satellite data also shows that global temperatures have been flat for the last 15 to 20 years. Trumpeting such data, however, has upset politicians and environmental groups and earned Christy and Spencer the label of “climate deniers.”
Keep Reading…

The polar bear was dying out; warming was predictable and irreversible; greenhouse gases were causing warming; and science is infallible - none of the is true and Al Gore proves the point.

59 share

40 is our optimum goal

Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now

Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row

An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice

These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated

The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’

Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.

But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.  (quote taken from the Daily Mail because the Marxist Media are in denial). 

Editor’s notes:  these weather satellites are the same satellites (RSS) whose data shows a 17 year slowdown to reversal,   of global warming averages and increases in regional cooling.  

It is possible that we on Mother Earth, have entered a cooling cycle that will last for decades to come. Here is why:

23 share in first 24

strong interest

<<<<  Decreasing solar activity over the course of the past three decades may suggest reasons for the cooling trend of the past 16 years and well into the future.   This explains the increased push for Warming Legislation.  The Lefties know that time is not their friend,  when it comes to warming/cooling trends.  

. . . . . .    if history is a guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a negative impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom-most layer of Earth’s atmosphere – and where we all live. There have been two notable historical periods with decades-long episodes of low solar activity. The first period is known as the “Maunder Minimum”, named after the solar astronomer Edward Maunder, and it lasted from around 1645 to 1715. The second one is referred to as the “Dalton Minimum”, named for the English meteorologist John Dalton, and it lasted from about 1790 to 1830. Both of these historical periods coincided with below-normal global temperatures in an era now referred to by many as the “Little Ice Age”. In addition, research studies in just the past couple of decades have found a complicated relationship between solar activity, cosmic rays, and clouds on Earth. This research suggests that in times of low solar activity where solar winds are typically weak; more cosmic rays reach the Earth’s atmosphere which, in turn, has been found to lead to an increase in certain types of clouds that can act to cool the Earth.  (text from Climate Depot.com,  here).  

Indeed, warming is occurring above the Equator in given regions. Per this warming world view, the US has warmed two tenths of one degree, Celsius, in 63 years, including the past 16 years of stable US temp averages, all of which only extends the growing season.

19 share 

moderate interest

Dr. Roy Spencer on the effects of global warming:

45 share

high reader interest

"There's no sign of global warming hurting productivity yet," Spencer added. "But the IPCC – which seems to be immune from facts – continues to insist that global warming is hurting our crops… when there's really no observational evidence for it. They are more and more in the realm of theory which is increasingly divorced from observation from the real world."(Go to Breitbart.com, here, for a one hour video discussion by Dr. Spencer;  at least visit the video for a few minutes and you will see why he is a man to be trusted.)


And who is Dr. Roy Spencer?  Roy Warren Spencer is a climatologist,Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA's Aqua satellite.He has served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.

He is known for his satellite-based temperature monitoring work, for which he was awarded the American Meteorological Society's Special Award.  (Wikipedia).

Visit Dr. Spencer's site:  drroyspencer.com

Problems for the Alarmist Warming Crowd: (1) "They" keep changing the numbers in the interest of "accurate" reporting. (2) Stable to cooling temps have been the case for a decade and a half.

18 share

Before you get too confused with all the numbers in this post,  here is the straight forward summary of what you are about to read: (a) The warming crowd keeps changing their numbers (July-'36 v July-'12), and (b),  we have been in a stable to cooling cycle for a decade and a half,  and counting. 

FYI:  I am pushing against the Warming Alarmists,  because they have gone back to their Alarmist agenda, in recent weeks,  and you need to know the facts.   

And,  off into the weeds we go:  
Know that for the past two years,  there has been a debate as to which "July" was the hottest July of all time:  July of 1936 or July of 2012. 

Every spike on the first chart (below) is "July" for a particular year,  beginning with 1895.  This is an official chart from NOAA  (i.e. "progressive governmental weather agency") .  

Up until 2012,  the hottest month of all time was July of 1936.  But in 2012,  NOAA recalibrated its 1936 findings,  and,  Sha Zam !!,  July of 2012 was, suddenly,  hotter than '36.  

BUT  !!!    . . . . .   As of two weeks ago,  another calibration was posted,  finding July of '36,  once again,  taking over the top spot by three hundredths of a percent as NOAA continues to fantasize about global warming in the context of the past 16 years (chart #2).   

Understand that the rapidly rising, annual,  heat index,  came to a screeching halt in 1999 with 12 of the past 16 years being being at or below 1998 levels,  a major problem for the Alarmist crowd.   

You would expect that NOAA* numbers would be "written in stone,"  but, in fact  -  and embarrassingly for the Alarmist Crowd - its numbers are, too often,  transitory.   The NOAA chart (#1) below is proof of that claim with NOAA unable to finally decide which is the hotter month.  But that might not be their only problem.   If July of '36 can be changed and then re-instated,  what about all those other numbers?  Seriously,  1936 is the only temperature not written in stone??? !!!   Well,  that and 2012 ??   

And note the heat/cooling cycles for historic "July."    Major heat in or near July of 1900 followed by cooler Julies.    Again,  hotter Julies in the 1930's followed by cooler July records.  Finally,  a July warming tread in the 2000's in the context of a level to cooling trend during that same period of time. 

#1

Confused?  Let's back up for an editorial moment.  In the above,  I talk about July and "July in context."   Understand that the Warming Crowd needs, or,  at least,  wants 2012-July to be warmer than 1936-July because it fits their alarmist narrative.  

"Context" has to do with the fact that,  while 2012-July ranks as either the hottest or second hottest July on record,  July is just one month of the year.  In the chart below (#2),  you can see that since 1998,  there have been only 4 years as warm or warmer than 1998,  with 2006 being the hottest year on record and 2011 being one of the coolest in two decades.  That 2012-July?  It was recorded in a very hot year,  but within the larger context of a stable or cooling trend (since 1998).  

Point of post:  (a) The warming crowd keeps changing their numbers, and (b),  we have been in a stable to cooling cycle for a decade and a half,  and counting.  

#2

_________________________

* NOAA = National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration

History - Earth's history - is problematic to the Utopian Science of global warming hysteria; here is why:

59 share 
reader interest - high

During the last 2.6 million years or so in the Quaternary period, ice ages, also called glacial ages, were times of extreme cooling of the Earth's climate where ice sheets and other types of glacier expanded to cover large areas of land. Between ice ages there were warmer interglacial periods and we are now living during such a time.

There have been many ice ages during the last 2.6 million years but when people talk about the Ice Age, they are often referring to the most recent glacial period, which peaked about 21,000 years ago and ended about 11,500 years ago.

What causes ice ages is not completely understood. The composition of the atmosphere, changes in the position of our planet around the Sun, and changes in ocean currents are some of the important factors that control the climate.  Source of quote:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/water_and_ice/ice_age

NASA tells us there have been \7 warming/cooling (as in "ice age") cycles in the past 650,000 year alone,  the last ending some "7,000 year ago."  I assume this coincides with the 11,000 number mentioned in the BBC article.  Just know that climate data is all over the map  -  very few issues involved with charting data,  include seriously consistent presentations.   

Editor’s notes:  And none of the related causes referenced above,  include man to any significant degree,  with the possible except of present time   . . . .  and there is no reason to believe that this cycle is the last in Earth’s history. 

You should understand that when the author(s) states,  “What causes ice ages is not completely understood,”  it is meant to imply that causation for these epic warming/cooling periods, does not fit into  any of the mathematical models of today’s Utopian/Hysterical Scientific theories  -  and there is more than one model for disaster. 

Also,  no one is talking about the fact that the same warming trends are occurring elsewhere in our solar system.  Why?  Because this information complicates the issue, not to mention the hysterical claims of the Alarmists.   Nor,  do they mention that "global warming" is actually,  regional warming.  Not all 7 of the world's geo-regions are warming or cooling at the same rates,  if at all.  

Look,  if 5 of the 7 regions in this world hold normal averages for a particular year,  a 6th shows a 1 degree drop in mean temp average,  and the 7th shows a 3 degree increase in mean temps,  if you average them together,  you come up with "global warming,"  when,  in fact,  only one region is actually problematic.  

#1  

Am I saying that this is the case?  Not at all,  but I am saying,  this is how easily "averages" can be used to deceive.  

#2

I give you three charts:  #1  shows warming/cooling trends as charted our weather satellite data  -  

#3  

And the second (#2)  shows the annual temps for the years before and after 1998.  As you can see with only two years of warming since 1998.  

The third (#3) chart,  includes the same period of time in #2,  but with no averages as high as 1998,  proving that there is not the consistency of data,  the Alarmist would have us believe  -  both #2 and 3 come from the Alarmist camp.   

Note: Click on images to enlarge.  

Special Report dealing with the myth of consensus science - beginning with a list of climate deniers and ending with a consensus survey of those who see no need for alarm.

49 share  - reader interest = high

I am beginning a list of climate experts opposing the Alarmists’ version of warming trends.  Here is my first installment:

Craig Idso, Willie Soon, Marc Morano,  Dr. Roy Spencer, principal research scientist for the University of Alabama,  Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, Space Research Sector of the Pulkovo Observatory,   Joe Bastardi, chief forecaster at Weatherbell Analytics,  Hon. George Christensen, member of the Australian Parliament,  Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, editor of Energy & Environment, a peer-reviewed science journal,  Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute,   John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel (now taken over by NBC News and elements who want to criminalize opposition speech on the subject),  Dr. Craig Idso, founder and former president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change,  Dr. Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science, University of Missouri,  Dr. S. Fred Singer, emeritus professor of environmental sciences  -  University of Virginia,  William Kininmonth, climatologist, Australasian Climate Research Institute, Dr. Jennifer Marohasy, biologist - Centre for Plant and Water Science, Central Queensland University,  Lord Christopher Monckton, former science advisor to Margaret Thatcher and chief policy advisor to the Science and Public Policy Institute,  Dr. Hal Doiron, a retired NASA rocket scientist who worked in the Apollo Program, and,  Anthony Watts, chief meteorologist for KPAY-AM radio and publisher of “Watts Up With That,” the most-read climate blog in the world.  

Note:  Willie Soon has been discredited (Feb 2015) for having accepted funding from oil related companies.  The article is here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/23/armageddon-for-climate-change-deniers.html.  Sadly, cheats and liars exist on both sides of this question.  To my knowledge,  Soon's science is or was not the issue,  however, only that he accepted funding from those related to the fossil fuel industry.  Whether this actually disqualifies the man,  is to be seen.   

Understand that there are more than 3,000 other scientists,  with specific academic qualifications as climate scientists,  who agree with those named above.  Further,  there is a big difference between warming and “alarming warming trends.”  A full 30% of climate scientists do not believe the trends are alarming or foretell of doom and gloom  --  making the claim of “consensus science”  a fantasy fact and the entire issue,  open to continued debate.  

Also,  understand that more than 70% of scientists supporting global warming hysteria,  are recipients of federal grants and funding - a requirement for which, is their position on global warming.  The Left simply does not believe in objective science or open debate,  and that is the sad truth of all this.  They do not want to have a discussion,  they want to control the discussion.  

_______________

Related articles:  

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/31000-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence  -  a pro- warming site with some objective numbers.  

http://www.petitionproject.org/  - a partisan site, admittedly,  but a site in which more than 9000 academics hold PhD's and are quite qualified in the supposed art of critical thinking.  More than this,  3,000 of the total 31,000 signees,  are qualified climate scientists.  

Dozens of climate scientists caught falsifying climate data for 15 years: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html





SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists ...
www.climatedepot.com/.../special-report-more-than-1000-...


Climate Depot
Dec 8, 2010 - This report's release coincides with the 2010 UN global warming summit in being held in Cancun. ... There is no believable evidence to support [the IPCC] claims. .... “The great climate science centers around the world are more than .... “startled” by an outpouring of scientists rejecting man-made climate ...
Also,  consider this article out of Forbes.com:  


www.forbes.com/.../the-overwhelming-judgment-of-science-reject...



Forbes


Jan 24, 2013 - The overall case for global warming alarmism is exceptionally flimsy. ... The Overwhelming Judgment of Science Rejects Obama's Global Warming Claims ... seen the fewest major hurricane strikes since at least the mid-1800s ...
http://globalwarminginperspective.wordpress.com/global-warming-myth-vs-reality/   The media is responsible for popularizing the fear that increases in carbon dioxide emissions will lead to a catastrophic upset in the global climate structure. The truth of the situation is: some parts of this new climate pattern are not completely understood and scientists are still researching. There are some myths about Global Warming that have been repeated and magnified so many times by so many people that most people accept them on blind faith without thinking to question them or listen to the other point of view. Here are some of the main myths and assumptions Global Warming followers support and why they are just plain untrue.

Charles Krauthammer: The myth of 'settled science' - The ...
www.washingtonpost.com/...the-myth.../c1f8d994-...



The Washington Post
Feb 20, 2014 - Irepeat: I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I've long believed that it cannot be good for humanity to be spewing ...

Question: How bad is Globull Warming? Answer: What warming?

37 share

Preface:   Most "alarmist" articles on the "depletion of sea ice in Antarctica" are written and published in our winter months  -  almost never in our summer months.  Why?  Because the One Worlders use the normal, summer cycle of life in the Antarctic,  when they decide to push another global fear cycle,  in their attempt to scare us all into believing Globull Warming as a "scientific fact."

Theirs is the policy of " the ends justify the means" as applied to the warming issue.  They KNOW the ice melt during our winter (here in America) is only cyclical,  but they push the "alarming melt of sea ice in the Antarctica" as if it was the result of a systemic, man-made,  issue,  and not the direct result of the annual summer "melt cycle" native to the Antarctic.  They tell a lie to further their agenda,  and this lie is a part of how these people "do business."  With the Progressive camp,  a lie is always good if it further the "cause."

Understand that the Antarctic sea ice circumstance is cyclical in its very nature.  In the Antarctic winter,  some 6 million square miles of Antarctic ocean is covered by ice.  In the summer months,  that coverage shrinks to 1 million square miles.  It happens every year. 

______________________________________________________________

(Related Fact:  The US is some 3.6 million square miles,  by comparison)

______________________________________________________________

Remember that fact,  the next time the Redistributionists manufacture a globull warming crisis out of the seasonal, Antarctic,  summer melt.   While there are years when the summer coverage is closer to 700,000 square miles., an "alarming" number,  the winter months erase that deficit  . . . . .  all of which is a normal annual cycle for the region.  

Winter in Antarctica runs from March through September,  North American “time.”  Below “60 degrees south,”  there is only one day for the entire year,  if you count a “day” as a nighttime event and a daytime event.  The Sun goes “down” in March,  and does not rise until the first part of October;  the summer "day" runs from October to March,  and the evening and the morning are one day.   

This year,  the growing winter ice increase is at record high levels, for the month of April,  near the beginning of the Antarctic Winter.   Couple this fact with record ice coverage in the Great Lakes,  and the severity of this past winter in Middle and Eastern American,  and you have winter circumstance that does not fit the [mathematical] models used to scare the world and fund the redistributionists' bank roll.  All of this goes to the confirmation of the fact that North America has been in a stable to cooling cycle for the past 20 years.       

Point of post:   All is well in the Antarctic and "its cycle of life,"   despite the doom and gloom reports of the past several years. 

________________________

Related:

Cool Facts About Antarctical.

Cool Antarctica

Antarctic Sea Ice At All-Time Levels (for April)

Sea Ice Update

Antarctica Hit Record Low Level  (Huffington Post)

Breitbart gives us this story. I am Midknight Review, but, now, it is your turn to review.

LEADING SCIENTIST REMOVES HIS NAME FROM 'SILLY' AND 'APOCALYPTIC' CLIMATE CHANGE DOCUMENT

by NICK HALLETT 25 Mar 2014 Breitbart.c

<<<  Too bad this bad boy doesn't know how to swim.  I mean,  isn't that the point of this Alarmist photo -- to argue that this particular bear is doomed because of global warming?  Incidentally,  the picture is more than 6 years old, sooo . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

An author of the forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate change has asked for his name to be removed from a summary document because of its "four horsemen of the apocalypse" rhetoric.

Professor Richard Tol, an economist at the University of Sussex who was the convening lead author of the chapter on economics, asked for his name to be removed from a summary document provided to policy makers.

He said: "The message in the first draft was that through adaptation and clever development these were manageable risks, but it did require we get our act together. This has completely disappeared from the draft now, which is all about the impacts of climate change and the four horsemen of the apocalypse. This is a missed opportunity."

"You have a very silly statement in the draft summary that says that people who live in war-torn countries are more vulnerable to climate change, which is undoubtedly true, but if you ask people in Syria whether they are more concerned with chemical weapons or climate change, I think they would pick chemical weapons - that is just silliness."

The report, due to be issued in the coming months, is set to push a bleak outlook, with leaked information speaking of significant effects on food supplies, security and economies.

The United Nations' IPCC is meeting in the Japanese city of Yokohama to agree on the report. The draft summary was been leaked yesterday, and has raised eyebrows from even the most climate-change friendly scientists.

The summary speaks of a wide range of negative effects likely to be caused by man-made global warming, some of which are "irreversible". It says that millions of people around the Asian coast will face displacement from flooding and land loss, and crop yields across the world will drop by two percent over the coming century.

But researchers have branded the summary as "alarmist", and sources have noted that the actual report is not as apocalyptic as the draft summary, which serves as an educational tool to policymakers around the world.

The last IPCC report was criticised its errors. These included the claim that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035, something the IPCC now admits to be untrue, and the statement that over half the Netherlands is below sea level. The real figure is 26 percent.

Source: Breitbart.com