One of the false claims that Global Warming Deniers
have been making in recent years is that “Global Warming Stopped
in 1998”. (Alternately they may pick some other year that “global
warming stopped”.) As per usual, this claim is another deliberate
GWD falsehood that can be easily debunked by looking at the actual
The year 2016 set an all-time temperature record as measured by
NOAA’s National Climate Data Center.
The graph above shows the
NOAA/National Climate Data Center12-month average temperature
data up thru Dec. 2016.
The year 2016 set an all-time temperature record as measured by
NASA/Columbia University’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
The graph above shows the GISS 12-month average temperature data
up thru Dec. 2016.
Data source: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
The year 2016 set an all-time temperature record as measured
by the UK’s Hadley Climate Research Unit.
Data source: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/
The year 2016 set an all-time temperature record as measured by
the Japan Meteorological Agency.
Data source: http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/gwp/temp/ann_wld.html
The year 2016 set an all-time temperature record as measured by
Berkeley Earth Analysis.
Data source: http://berkeleyearth.org/global-warming-2016/
And what do the Global Warming Deniers say about this record
Temperature records can’t be
It’s a conspiracy.
Then and now photographs of melting glaciers can’t be trusted
because: It’s a conspiracy.
See “Melting Alaska makes the front
Videos of high tides flooding Miami can’t be trusted
It’s a conspiracy.
See “Miami Beach Sea Level Rise,
Also see: “Miami Beach’s battle to stem
Anything that is not part of our “Alternate Reality”
can’t be trusted
It’s a conspiracy.
The graph above shows the actual global temperature
anomalies as compiled by NOAA/NCDC (National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration / National Climate Data Center -
) from 1975 to Dec. 2016. Individual months, a 25 month centered
moving average, a least squares trend line, and 10-year
warming rates are shown. The graph uses data that can be found at:
Slope (green line) = 0.172 degrees C. warming per decade.
The moving average (yellow line) shows that new record high global
temperatures were set through at least Dec. 2016.
Note: NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) maintains the
world's largest climate data archive.
If you want to use calendar years as your measurement
tool, then the NOAA/NCDC data shows that 2005 broke the 1998
average for record warmth. Then 2010 broke the record again. Then
2014 broke the record again. 2015 set still another
record. And 2016 set still another record. (Data available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
The NASA / Columbia University temperature database
shows a similar pattern. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Each data point for the warming rate (red line) is
the least squares slope for the 20-year period ending as of the
plot date. Thus the left end of the red line is the least squares
warming-per-decade-rate for the 20-year period from Jan. 1975
through Dec. 1994. The data point at Dec. 2010 shows the least
squares warming per decade rate for the 20-year period from Jan.
1991 through Dec. 2010. Etc.
What is interesting is the consistency of the warming
rate. There are two notes of interest.
1) The warming rate has accelerated slightly from what
was seen at the left side of the chart.
2) The calculated warming rate (red line) will get a little
upward kick in a couple of years when the 1997/1998 El Nino will
be dropped from the 20-year time span.
When statisticians want to discern a trend from
seemingly random data, they frequently calculate and plot trend
lines along with plotting the original data. The simplest of these
is a linear regression ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_regression
) straight trend line. There are additional calculations that can
be made that show how well the trend line fits the data and the
magnitude of possible errors, but the simplest analysis simply
plots the trend line along with the original data.
It should be noted that when longer time periods and
larger databases are used, the potential amount of error in the
calculated trend line’s coefficients is reduced. (Potential errors
could be accidental or they could be a deliberate manipulation by
people who want to misrepresent what is actually happening.)
The charts below show that even if you “Cherry Pick”
the time period for your temperature data, least squares
regression analysis is robust enough to still show that world
temperatures are continuing to rise. All the charts use data that
is available at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
Also please compare each “Cherry Picked” chart with the earlier
chart that shows the temperature record since 1975.
The chart above shows the temperature record and a least squares
trend line with the time period beginning in Jan. 1996. (The 1998
El Nino event actually started in 1997. Thus 1996 is used for the
The chart above shows the temperature record and a least squares
trend line with the time period beginning in Jan. 1998.
The chart above shows the temperature record and a least squares
trend line with the time period beginning in Jan. 1999.
All of the above charts were generated by Microsoft’s
Excel. All of the charts show that the world’s average temperature
is rising. You can alter the slope of the trend line by
selectively picking your starting point, but the directional trend
is the same. It doesn’t make any difference whether you pick a
date just before “Global Warming Stopped in 1998”, right at
“Global Warming Stopped in 1998”, or just after “Global Warming
Stopped in 1998”. The actual data shows that in reality:
Global Warming Didn’t Stop in 1998.
The 1975 thru
1997 Trend Line had it Right
It is interesting to compare a future forecast that
just uses the 1975 thru 1997 data with what has actually happened
since then. If trend lines have a value, then they should be
useful for predicting the future.
Thus, the NOAA/NCDC data for just Jan. 1975
thru Dec. 1997 was used for still another analysis. As with the
other charts, the trend line function in Microsoft’s Excel was
used to calculate a trend line. As with the other graphs, only the
plotted data was used for input to Excel’s trend line calculator.
The results are shown below.
Slope = 0.160 degrees C. warming per decade.
If you use the above trend line to make a temperature
anomaly forecast for the 1998 to 2016 period, what would you
expect? Would you expect temperature anomalies to cluster around
(or above) the 0.60 level? Now look at the preceding charts. What
Please compare the trend line that uses just the Jan.
1975 thru Dec. 1997 data (shown above) with the trend line that
uses the Jan. 1975 thru De. 2016 data (first Excel chart). The
upward slope of the two trend lines is almost identical. If you
check the right end of the two trend lines, the warming rate has
actually accelerated slightly.
The upward trend is the same whether you include the
Jan. 1998 to Dec. 2016 data or whether you omit it. If the average
temperature for Jan. 1998 to Dec. 2016 had been something
different than what was forecast by the 1975 thru 1997 data, then
the slope (steepness) of the trend line would have changed. What
happened was that the average increase in temperature for the Jan.
1998 thru Dec. vs. 2016 period turned out to be almost identical
to what was forecast by the earlier data.
Global Warming did not stop in 1998.
Land vs. Oceanic
It is interesting to compare the temperature record
for land areas vs. the oceans. (Land areas in the northern
hemisphere are used since southern hemisphere land temperatures
are more subject to oceanic modification.)
71 percent of the earth’s surface area is oceanic.
Any forcing that would tend to change the earth’s temperature is
slowed by the oceans since it takes a huge amount of heat input to
produce much temperature change in the massive volume of the
Slope = 0.321 degrees C. warming per decade.
The chart above shows the Northern Hemisphere “Land
Only” temperature record as measured by NOAA’s National Climate
Data Center. The actual data is available at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
Slope = 0.130 degrees C. warming per decade.
The chart above shows oceanic surface temperatures.
Again, the actual data is available at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
Both charts use the same temperature scale.
If you compare the two charts, there are several
noticeable differences. First, there is a much greater month to
month variation in temperatures for “land only”. This is to be
expected since inland areas such as Chicago are going to have much
larger temperature variations than oceanic areas.
Of greater significance, the rate of temperature rise
for “Land Only” is more than double the rate for ocean
temperatures. The lag effect of the oceans has less influence over
land areas. Thus “land only” temperatures are more “up to date” in
showing what is really happening with global warming. Note that
the rate of temperature rise for land areas as shown by the trend
line is 0.321 degrees C per decade which is 5.8 degrees F per
Greenhouse gases produce thermal forcing which is
equivalent to the heat of just a few mini Christmas tree lights
per sq. meter. It takes decades at this rate to significantly warm
an oceanic column of water that is thousands of feet deep. However
this net forcing is a 24/7 average, and current levels of
atmospheric carbon dioxide have already committed us to hundreds
of years of future oceanic warming.
The years 2011 – 2013 were characterized by an
increase in mixing between warm surface water and deeper cool
water in the earth’s oceans. (Large storms such as Hurricane Sandy
are really good as mixing agents.) Mixing cools off the surface
water - and the air above it. This mixing caused oceanic surface
temperatures to lag further behind the warming that has been
observed in land areas, but once you know what has held back the
“sea” component, it becomes obvious that:
Global Warming did not stop in 1998.
As measured by the amount of heat going into the
earth’s oceans, it looks like global warming may have actually
accelerated since the year 2000.
The graph above shows the amount of heat energy that
has been added to the world’s oceans. The original graph can be
seen as Fig. 1 in the published paper “Distinctive climate signals
in reanalysis of global ocean heat content” which can be accessed
Note: OHC stands for Ocean Heat Content
To give some idea of the amount of heat that has been
added to the oceans, 1023
Joules is enough heat to warm
over 67 thousand tons of water from 40 deg. F to 140 deg. F for
each of the 7 billion people on planet earth. (1,000 Joules ~=
The chart at the right
shows the results of other studies that have measured the increase
in oceanic heat content. Thus the results of the more recent study
confirm these earlier studies. The original version of the graph
at the right can be seen at: NOAA’s 2009 “State of the Climate”
report. Downloadable from:
This earlier chart shows the “Heat Content Change” of
the top 700 meters of the world’s oceans as measured by several
researchers. As above, the unit of measure is “Joules” which is
the standard metric measure for energy. (Note: XBT stands for
expendable bathythermagraph data)
The vast majority of the heat imbalance due to global
warming actually goes to warming the oceans. The increase in air
temperatures and glacial melting is actually just a small
As noted below, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation
appears to determine (or measure) where the heat from thermal
forcing ends up. In recent years, ocean currents (which are
subject to the PDO) are continuing to circulate heat from the
ocean’s surface down to deeper levels.
The graph above is from http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/
and updates Ocean Heat Content up through June 2013. The world’s
oceans continue to warm at an accelerating pace.
Note: Ocean temperature measurements are made by the Argo buoy
It can be easily calculated that the increase in
oceanic heat from 6E22 Joules in 1998 to 19E22 Joules in 2013 is
equal to the accumulated heat content of detonating 4 Hiroshima
Atomic Bombs per second (running 24/7 = 126,000,000+ bombs per
year) from 1998 to the present.
for the 67E12 Joules heat content of one of these bombs.)
The graph above shows the Ocean Heat Content as
measured by the Argo buoy system (red line in the previous graph)
up through Sept 2016. (Data available at http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/basin_data.html
) The slope of the trend line shows us how fast the oceans are
As of Sept. 2016 the warming rate is:
1.04E22 Joules per year
= 4.9 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs per second
= 3.30 trillion 100-watt light bulbs running 24/7.
= 440 100-watt light bulbs for each of the 7,500,000,000 people on
all running 24/7.
Now calculate your electric bill.
Note: The relatively short time span involved for the above data
means that the calculation for the warming trend will be subject
to variations (possibly +/- 10% in the slope) as new data becomes
available , but the long term warming trend is expected to become
Conclusion: Global Warming did not stop in 1998.
The PDO and the
Rate of Atmospheric Temperature Rise
The rate that atmospheric temperatures rise is a
complex function that includes all possible components. One of
these components is the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. A
detailed description of the PDO can be seen here. http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
currents in the Pacific Ocean are known to undergo small changes
depending on the positive or negative state of the PDO.
The chart above shows the PDO Index starting with 1975.
Data for the chart can be seen at: http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/PDO.latest
Note that the PDO was mostly negative for the 30-year period
The PDO appears to be a way of measuring the mixing
rate between surface water and deep water in the Pacific Ocean.
When the PDO Index is predominately positive, there appears to be
less mixing of surface and deep water in the Pacific Ocean. This
allows rapid surface warming. (Including the air in contact with
When the PDO is positive, atmospheric temperatures
rise rapidly in response to carbon dioxide forcing.
When the PDO is predominately negative, it means that
the mixing rate between surface and deep water in the Pacific
Ocean is greater. An increased amount of warm surface water sinks
deeper into the ocean and an increased amount of colder deep water
rises to replace it. (This frequently shows up as a La Nina
episode.) This colder water cools the air that is in contact with
it. When the PDO is negative, global warming as measured by
atmospheric temperatures proceeds at a slower rate because more of
the carbon dioxide forced heating goes into the deep ocean instead
of the atmosphere.
Global warming is going to continue no matter what
state the PDO is in. The PDO just controls where the heat is
Satellites can measure “brightness” microwave
radiation which can be translated into temperatures. What the
satellites lack in surface detail is offset by their ability to
quickly observe the whole world. However, there are known problems
when satellites are used to try to determine long term climate
changes. The many “revisions” that appear in the satellite record
attest to continuity problems that have yet to be satisfactorily
resolved. (See “A little caution should be used . . .” below)
The University of Alabama – Huntsville uses NASA’s
satellites to monitor global temperatures. The graph below shows
what has been observed up through Dec. 2016.
Slope = 0.155 degrees C. warming per decade.
The data source for the above graph is the “Globe” column at:
It would be of interest as to just how Global Warming Deniers
define their claim that “Global Warming Stopped in 1998”.
A little caution should be used regarding satellite temperature
measurements. Satellite observations are most useful for observing
short term events, but there are multiple intrinsic problems if
they are used for temperature observations over multi-year
“Satellites do not measure
temperature. They measure radiances in various wavelength bands,
which must then be mathematically inverted to obtain indirect
inferences of temperature. The resulting temperature profiles
depend on details of the methods that are used to obtain
temperatures from radiances.”
“The satellite time series is not homogeneous. It is constructed
from a series of satellites with similar but not identical
sensors. The sensors also deteriorate over time, and corrections
are necessary for orbital drift and decay. Particularly large
differences between reconstructed temperature series occur at
the few times when there is little temporal overlap between
successive satellites, making intercalibration difficult.”
Satellite temperature measurements are helpful, but they are not
as accurate as surface measurements using “old fashion”
thermometers (which are easy to calibrate). As stated on the
Remote Sensing Systems website:
“A similar, but stronger case can
be made using surface temperature datasets, which I consider to
be more reliable than satellite datasets (they certainly agree
with each other better than the various satellite datasets
More technical explanations of satellite observational problems
can be found at:
One of the recent claims by Global Warming Deniers is
that satellite temperature measurements are more accurate than
surface temperature measurements. This is another fabrication by
Global Warming Deniers.
As can be seen in the chart above, satellite
temperature measurements have 5 times the error as surface
temperature measurements. For a detailed explanation please
Also please see the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BnkI5vqr_0
where Carl Mears (Senior scientist at Remote Sensing Systems)
explains the problems involved with satellite observations and
presents the above chart at 2:11 into the video.
“Custom Adjustments” to the Satellite Record
The UAH satellite chart shown above uses the official
“peer reviewed” data that is accepted and used by NOAA. For
example see “Microwave Sounding Unit Temperature Anomalies” at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/msu/
However, Roy Spencer (a known Global Warming Denier –
see “Roy Spencer’s Great Blunder, Part 1” https://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/roy-spencers-great-blunder-part-1/
“Journal editor resigns over 'fundamentally flawed' paper by Roy
) is not above applying his own “custom adjustments” to the
official measurements to try to promote his own denial agenda.
Roy Spencer has applied his own “Custom Adjustments”
(And he acknowledges that they are NOT peer reviewed. See http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/04/version-6-0-of-the-uah-temperature-dataset-released-new-lt-trend-0-11-cdecade/
) that come closer to the message that he would like to promote.
(Click on “Latest Global Temp. Anomaly” at http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
Let’s compare the peer-reviewed official measurements
as shown above with the results after Roy Spencer’s “Custom
Adjustments” to the same observations.
Slope = 0.123 degrees C. warming per decade.
The chart above shows the UAH satellite temperature
record after using Roy Spencer’s new “Custom Adjustments”.
Temperature anomalies in early 2016 are still setting new record
highs as per the moving average, but “somehow” the uptrend doesn’t
seem to be as steep. If we subtract version 5.6 data from Roy
Spencer’s “Custom Adjustments” (v. 6.0), we can see the difference
in the two data sets.
Slope = -0.03 degrees C. (cooling) per decade.
The chart above shows the temperature anomaly
differences between the official peer-reviewed data and Roy
Spencer’s “Custom Adjustments”. We see that the “Custom
Adjustments” have produced more than 0.1 degrees of “cooling” from
the late 1990s to the present. Global Warming Deniers try to
promote their “Global Warming stopped in 1998” agenda.
Presumably Spencer’s rebuttal would classify the
earth’s melting glaciers (see below) as part of a “global warming
. . . But then again, what would you expect from someone whose
“scientific methodology” is:
“I finally became convinced that the theory of creation
actually had a much better scientific basis than the theory of
“The Evolution Crisis”
For more information, please see:
YALE Climate Connections
“How Reliable are Satellite Temperatures?”
For additional information on how Roy Spencer and John Christy
willfully misrepresent satellite data, please see “Republicans'
favorite climate chart has some serious problems”
It also appears that the “Denier’s” chart (above)
misrepresents the weather balloon observations (see below). Global
Warming models predict warming in the lower atmosphere
(troposphere) and cooling in the upper atmosphere (stratosphere).
This is exactly what has been observed.
The “Denier’s” chart appears to have averaged the two
regions (“Circles – Avg. 4 balloon datasets”) which gives a much
slower rate of “total” warming.
If you check the balloon observations (below) that
show the lower half of the atmosphere, the average warming amount
from the late 1970s to 2015 runs between 0.6 and 0.7 degrees. This
is exactly what the models (red line) were predicting.
Also, if you check the label at the top
of Christy’s chart, Christy has included temperature readings
up to 50,000 feet. 50,000 feet up is in the stratosphere – which
is cooling as predicted by global warming models. Thus Christy has
averaged stratospheric cooling with lower tropospheric warming to
get a “slower warming rate”.
The chart above shows the temperature anomalies at
the 100 millibar level in the atmosphere. (Averages a little over
50,000 feet above sea level.) Data source: 100 mb column in the
Globe section at:
Please see the pressure < --- > altitude converter at http://www.srh.noaa.gov/epz/?n=wxcalc_pressurealtitude
to convert pressure in millibars to altitude above sea level.
Christy then compares this “slight-of-hand” slower
warming rate with the expected much faster warming rate near and
at the earth’s surface. He then claims that the warming rate
hasn’t kept up with the warming rate forecast by the computer
models. He then claims that this (deceitful) warming rate “proves”
that the computer models (which are just numeric calculations that
use known laws of physics) are wrong/worthless.
It would appear that some of the serious problems of
the “Republicans' favorite climate chart” include WILLFUL
MISREPRESENTATION OF THE DATA.
Full Definition of
1 a : DECEIT, TRICKERY; specifically
: intentional perversion of truth in order to
another to part
with something of value or to surrender a legal right
b : an act of deceiving or
misrepresenting : TRICK
2 a : a person who is not what he or she pretends
to be : IMPOSTOR;
b : one that is not what it seems or
is represented to be
As for Christy’s analytical forecasting ability . . .
From Discover Magazine in Feb. 2001:
“Christy thinks it equally likely that the Earth's surface will
“Christy has been wrong for decades”
“Over the years, Spencer and Christy developed a reputation for
making serial mistakes that other scientists have been forced to
NOAA/NCDC (National Climate Data Center) also keeps temperature
records as measured by weather balloons. Altitudes above sea level
vary from sea level to 30 mb (high in the stratosphere).
The chart below shows temperature anomalies at the 850 mb level.
(About 4,000 to 5,000 feet above sea level which is in the lower
The chart above shows temperature anomalies at the 850 mb
level as measured by weather balloons (Radiosonde Atmospheric
Temperature Products for Accessing Climate (RATPAC))
The chart above shows temperature anomalies at the 700 mb level
(about 9,000 to 10,000 feet above sea level) as measured by
weather balloons (Radiosonde Atmospheric Temperature Products for
Accessing Climate (RATPAC))
The chart above shows temperature anomalies at the
500 mb level (about 18,000 to 19,000 feet above sea level) as
measured by weather balloons (Radiosonde Atmospheric Temperature
Products for Accessing Climate (RATPAC)). The 3 charts show the 3
standard pressure levels for the lowest 1/2 of the atmosphere.
(Data for 2016 show partial year results)
The description for the above charts can be found at:
If you follow a couple of links at the above webpage, you can
access the source data for the above charts. It's the 850 mb,
700mb, and 500 mb data in the “Globe” section at:
Of note: The 1998 temperature spike that shows up in
the satellite data can also be seen in the 700 mb and 500 mb
charts. The El Nino that occurred that year forced “wet adiabatic”
lapse rates over equatorial regions that replaced the more normal
“dry adiabatic” rates. This led to relatively higher temperatures
at the 700 and 500 mb levels. (The “adiabatic rate” at any given
location describes the rate that a parcel of air would cool
if you lift it from sea level to higher elevations. Wet adiabatic
rates cool more slowly since heat is released due to water vapor
condensation. Thus “slower cooling” produces air that is less cold
than what happens with “faster cooling”.)
As can be seen in the charts, weather balloon data confirms that
Global Warming didn’t stop in 1998.
temperature record vs. projections/forecasts by the real
Earlier we looked at one of the fabricated CMIP-5
charts that Global Warming Deniers tout. As stated at the top of
this page, “Global Warming Deniers claim that Global Warming is a
hoax/fraud/scam. They lie, they are willfully ignorant, and they
It is worthwhile comparing actual temperature observations vs. the
real CMIP-5 / IPCC projections.
The chart above was posted on Ed Hawkins’ Twitter page. https://twitter.com/ed_hawkins
As stated on his Twitter page, Ed is a climate
scientist at the University of Reading. Conversely, Global Warming
Deniers resort to blogs by people such as Anthony Watts (no
college degree in anything), Christopher Monckton (a British
politician whose educational background is classics and
The chart above shows the actual temperature record
as recorded by HadCRUT4 as well as projections by the IPCC and the
CMIP5 computer model ensemble. ( http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/index.html
Instead of actual temperatures not living up to what
the models had predicted, we see that up through 2015, global
temperatures were running at the upper end (warmer than) of what
was forecast. In the real world, Global Warming (and all of its
expected consequences) is perhaps running faster than what was
The lesson to be learned is that Global Warming
Deniers fabricate their “facts”. If you want the real facts, check
a reliable source.
The reason that global warming is occurring is
that human activities have modified the earth’s ability to radiate
heat back out into space. The requirement for the earth’s
temperature to remain constant is that incoming solar energy
(“solar irradiance”) must be balanced by a combination of
reflection of this incoming solar radiation and outgoing long wave
heat radiation. If incoming solar radiation is relatively constant
(and it is), but outgoing heat radiation is reduced, then the
earth will warm until rising temperatures (which increase outgoing
radiation) can establish a new temperature equilibrium.
Human activities have changed the earth’s ability to
radiate heat. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution,
combustion of fossil fuels (natural gas, oil, and coal) have
increased the atmospheric content of carbon dioxide by over 40%.
Carbon dioxide slows the earth’s ability to radiate heat into
space. Carbon dioxide and multiple other human generated
components have altered the heat balance that existed before the
This imbalance caused by human activities is called
“Radiative Forcing”. That chart below illustrates the various
components of climate forcing, and shows the changes in the net
magnitude of this forcing since 1750.
The chart above is part of the “Summary for
Policymakers” section of the IPCC’s AR5 report. The top portion
shows the various components and the magnitude of their forcing.
The bottom portion shows the increasing amount of forcing for
various years as measured against what existed in the year 1750.
The “Solar” component is of interest. Global Warming
Deniers try to sidestep the issue by blaming the sun for global
warming. The change in irradiance from the sun is negligibly small
compared to 1750 values, and has actually decreased since the
mid-1980s. Thus Global Warming Deniers are wrong again when they
claim the sun is responsible.
As a technical note, notice that all the molecules
listed under “Resulting Atmospheric Drivers” have 3 or more atoms
in each molecular compound. Molecules that have 3 or more atoms
are capable of absorbing (and reradiating) long-wavelength heat
radiation while ordinary atmospheric oxygen (O2
) form molecules with only 2 atoms each.
Molecules that only have 2 atoms do not absorb long-wavelength
radiation (the radiation at ordinary temperatures). Thus ordinary
oxygen and nitrogen which compose most of the content of the
atmosphere are not directly involved in the earth’s heat budget.
Overall, forcing is increasing and, most likely, will
continue to increase for many decades into the future. Other
feedback factors such as increased water vapor in the atmosphere
are only beginning to kick in, and will become much stronger in
the future. The continuing increase in forcing supports the
observation from oceanic heating (shown earlier) that total global
warming is accelerating. Planet earth will be a much different
place by the time temperatures warm enough to reestablish thermal
Observations that Global Warming is Continuing
Switzerland’s World Glacier Monitoring Service
The chart above shows what is happening to the
world’s glaciers. They are melting! Not only are
the world’s glaciers shrinking, the shrinkage rate has accelerated
in recent years.
As for the false claims by the Deniers that glaciers
in the Himalayas are advancing, a detailed study that analyzed
7,090 glaciers in central Asia (including the Himalayas and
Karakoram) and that was published in 2012 ( http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n9/full/nclimate1580.html
) found that:
For more information (including then and now
photos) about “The Mighty Himalayan Glaciers are Vanishing”,
please see http://www.glacierworks.org/
. There’s also a 75 minute video “Rivers of Ice: Vanishing
Glaciers of the Greater Himalaya” at http://research.microsoft.com/apps/video/default.aspx?id=171318
Alternately, please see http://www.durangobill.com/GwdLiars/GwdLiarsChristopherMonckton.html
for a “Poster Child” example of a Global Warming Denier lying
about the Himalaya’s Melting Glaciers.
Also, please see:
“Study: Mount Everest losing its cloak of ice and snow as world
Also please see:
“Multi-decadal mass loss of glaciers in the Everest area (Nepal
Himalaya) derived from stereo imagery”
“We reveal that the glaciers have been significantly losing mass
since at least 1970, despite thick debris cover. The specific mass
loss for 1970–2007 is 0.32±0.08mw.e. a−1”
(mw.e. a-1 = meters of water equivalent per annum(year))
The world’s glaciers did not stop melting after 1998.
NASA has independently measured that the world’s
glaciers are melting. How about 4.3 trillion tons of melting from
2003 to 2010?
If global warming stopped in 1998, what melted 4.3 trillion tons
Upsala Glacier 2003 to 2011
The Upsala Glacier is one of the larger outflow
glaciers from the Southern Patagonia Icefield. The two pictures
below were generated by Google Earth. The yellow line was
generated by Google Earth’s distance measuring tool, and is over
two miles long. The small blue squares show where people have
The picture above shows the Upsala Glacier as of May 11, 2003.
The picture above shows the Upsala Glacier as of Dec.
28, 2011. Icebergs and many smaller ice fragments are floating on
a lake which now occupies the former location of the glacier.
If Global Warming stopped in 1998, what caused the Upsala Glacier
to melt back over 2 miles from 2003 to 2011?
The first two pictures below are from NASA's Earth
The first picture shows Alaska’s Columbia Glacier as of 1986.
This next picture shows the Columbia Glacier as of 2014.
Finally, this third picture shows a Google Earth view
of the same area. Google Earth’s distance measuring tool has been
used to show that the glacier has melted back 11 miles. (Yellow
If Global Warming stopped in 1998, what melted 11 miles of the
Columbia Glacier after 1998?
Polar Sea Ice
Another “claim” by Global Warming Deniers is that
Polar Sea Ice Extent is expanding. Again, this is another Lie.
The above chart is from NASA’s Earth Observatory.
(As published by the American Meteorological Society http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00605.1
The chart shows Polar Sea Ice Extent as observed by
satellites from 1979 thru 2013. There has been a slight increase
in Antarctic Sea Ice Extent but this has been more than offset by
larger declines in Arctic Sea Ice Extent. The combined sea
ice extent is in a continuing downtrend. (Note: As of mid Nov.
2016 Antarctic Sea Ice Extent is setting new record levels.)
(From the NASA link)
“Furthermore, the global sea ice
loss has accelerated. From 1979 to 1996, the ice loss was 21,500
square kilometers (8,300 square miles) per year. This rate from
1996 to 2013 was 50,000 square kilometers (19,500 square miles)
lost per year.”
Note: The increase in sea ice around Antarctica was forecast 13
“It [Antarctic sea ice cover] is also qualitatively consistent
with the counterintuitive prediction of a global atmospheric-ocean
model of increasing sea ice around Antarctica with climate warming
due to the stabilizing effects of increased snowfall on the
If Global Warming stopped in 1998, why has sea ice extent
accelerated its downtrend – including a new record low in 2012?
Addendum: As of Nov. 2016, both Arctic and Antarctic sea ice
extent are making all-time new lows.
Sea Level is
The chart above shows what is happening to sea level.
As the world warms, sea level rises due to thermal expansion plus
water from melted glacial ice. The most recent data at http://ibis.grdl.noaa.gov/SAT/SeaLevelRise/LSA_SLR_timeseries_global.php
indicates this rate of sea level rise is continuing to accelerate
beyond what was observed up through 2011.
The chart above is a copy of what can been seen at
Columbia University’s web page at http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/SeaLevel/
. The rate of sea level rise has quintupled since the 1900 to 1930
“So-called "nuisance flooding" -- which causes public
inconveniences such as frequent road closures, overwhelmed storm
drains, and compromised infrastructure -- has increased on all
three U.S. coasts, between 300 and 925 percent since the 1960s”
If global warming stopped in 1998, what is causing sea level to
and Sea Level
Holland Island is one of the famous (and a bit sad)
stories of sea level rise.
In 1900 Holland Island had a population of 253.
Today, due to sea level rise and subsidence, there is nothing left
(Click on image for a large version)
A 2013 Google Earth view of the Holland Island area
is shown on the left along with an 1898 map on the right. Since
1898, Long Island and the unnamed islet north of it are gone. The
north end of Adam Island has been submerged to where only a few
sand bars are left.
The north to south peninsula that used to exist on
the southwest side of Holland Island no longer exists. The marshy
peninsula on the southeast side of Holland Island is also gone.
The northern peninsula that extended nearly to Adam Island has
been reduced to a few sand bars. This is where the “Last House on
Holland Island” stood until 2010. It is now gone.
Sea level is expected to rise 20 feet over the next
1,000 years. (See “Eemian interglacial” in the next section
(below)) This is enough to submerge major coastal cities
including Miami and New Orleans. Over the next 1,000 years these
and other cities will gradually be abandoned just as Holland
Island has been abandoned. Sometime between now and 1,000 years
from now, there will be a “Last Building in Miami”. 1,000 years
from now, it too will be gone.
And long before the land is submerged, the millions
of septic/sewage systems will no longer function. (Oh S _ _
_ – All over your backyard)
The process of abandonment will be gradual salt water
intrusion which will rot building foundations and destroy fresh
water supplies. (Throw in a hurricane or two for good measure.)
Taxes will gradually/relentlessly be increased for public works
programs to try to protect what is left. The current population
will try to hold out, but future generations will understand what
is happening. They will decide to live somewhere else.
USGS study for Miami-Dade County: “The results of the study
indicate that as of 2011 [from 1995 to 2011] approximately 1,200
square kilometers (km2
) of the mainland part of the
Biscayne aquifer were intruded by saltwater.”
Isle de Jean
The inhabitants of Isle de Jean Charles, LA are being
forced to relocate as a result of rising sea level. The map on the
left is a USGS map using 1963 data. The land surrounding Isle de
Jean Charles was a marsh – but it was land.
The right-hand view is via Google Earth. Marshy areas
are now just muddy water. It won’t take very many more years until
Isle de Jean Charles is also “just muddy water”.
Ditto for New Orleans.
Ditto for Miami.
Beach, North Carolina
The three pictures below give an idea of what is
happening and what will continue to happen to beachfront property
around the world.
The picture above is a Google Earth view of the seashore in North
Topsail Beach, NC as of 1993.
The picture above is a Google Earth view of the same area, but as
Q: What has changed in the intervening years?
1) The beachfront in front of the
condos (lower left) is gone.
2) The beachfront and first row of beach homes to the right of
the condos are gone.
3) Walls of sandbags have been placed in front of what is left
to try to postpone the inevitable.
And what has happened to property values of the remaining homes in
North Topsail Beach?
The picture above is Zillow’s ( http://www.zillow.com/
estimate of the value of the house with the blue roof as well as
values for all homes in the North Topsail area.
Global Warming Deniers are invited to invest their
savings in North Topsail Beach real estate.
The 800,000 Year
Historical Carbon Dioxide Record
NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory has an
animation video at http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/history.html
that shows the historical record of what humans are doing vs. what
“Nature” does. The chart below is a print screen image from this
The near vertical line at the right end of the graph
shows what human activities have done in the last few decades. The
atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide due to human
activities continues to accelerate upwards.
In the Eemian interglacial that peaked about 125,000
years ago, sea level rose so that the nearest land to what is now
Miami, FL was some 35 to 40 miles away. What do you suppose will
happen when glacial melting and thermal expansion of the oceans
catches up to what we have already done?
What is Going to
Happen to Sea Level?
The picture below shows a diagram that was published
in the July 2015 issue of Science Magazine.
(“The World’s Leading Journal of Original Scientific Research”)
“Sea-level rise due to polar ice-sheet mass loss during past warm
The diagram shows:
“Peak global mean temperature, atmospheric CO2, maximum global
mean sea level (GMSL), and source(s) of meltwater.
Light blue shading indicates uncertainty of GMSL maximum. Red pie
charts over Greenland and Antarctica denote fraction (not
location) of ice retreat.”
In the Eemian Interglacial that peaked about 125,000
years ago, sea level was some 6 to 9 meters (20 to 30 feet) higher
than current levels. This occurred even though maximum carbon
dioxide levels were well below what we have now. The right portion
of the diagram shows what is expected to happen when warming and
glacial melting catch up to current carbon dioxide levels. What is
going to happen with future levels of carbon dioxide?
A Typical Example
of a GWD “Source” for the “Stopped” Lie
On Oct. 13, 2012 a British Global Warming Denier
tabloid (the “Mail Online”) ran a story with the following
stopped 16 years ago,
reveals Met Office report quietly released...
and here is the chart to prove it”
The author of the article (David Rose) has a history
of willful misrepresentations of reality. But then again, neither
David Rose nor his tabloid audience are interested in factual
The story included the following chart:
“Firstly, the Met Office has not issued a report on this issue.”
Thus when the headline states that there was a report, it is just
another Global Warming Denier lie.
The above graph (which has a “Ben
Weller” label as a source) has been widely circulated in Global
Warming Denier blogs on the Internet. The article contains no
source reference for the “temperature data” in the graph. The
origin and credibility for the chart data is unknown, and the only
information we have is that the chart was authored by “Ben
It’s instructive to compare the graph that was
published in the Daily Mail’s “Mail Online” with the actual
temperature record as compiled by the UK’s Climate Research Unit.
Slope = 0.18 degrees C. warming per decade.
The graph above shows the Hadley Climate Research
Unit’s monthly temperature anomalies from 1975 to present. The
data can be accessed and checked for accuracy at
(Note: Old versions of the table are subject to minor changes as
corrections and late data become available.)
The 35 month centered moving average (yellow line) is
of interest. It shows that average temperatures beginning in
Dec. 2001 have been consistently warmer than the warmest 35 month
average that was seen in 1998. If global warming stopped in 1998,
why have temperatures for the last 18+ years averaged warmer than
what was observed in 1998?
In spite of what the Mail Online article claims, it is obvious
that Global Warming didn’t stop in 1998.
The HadCRUTEM4 data can be easily traced to an actual
temperature database. The Daily Mail “Mail Online” graph is
attributed to “Ben Weller”.
Who or what is Ben Weller?
Google searches using
“Ben Weller” climate
“Ben Weller” meteorology
“Ben Weller” temperature
return links to various blogs/forums/websites that discuss the
article, but not to any source that would indicate that “Ben
Weller” works for any scientific organization. Conclusion: The
“Ben Weller” name on the chart does not refer to a scientific
There is a Ben Weller freelance photographer who has
contributed work to the Daily Mail/Mail Online. The suspicion
arises that Ben Weller has widened his repertoire to include
fabricating “Graphic Arts”.
As for the Daily Mail’s/Mail Online’s “journalistic
credibility”, you should realize that they devote a lot of
attention to “features” such as:
Over 19,000 hits at the DailyMail website.
Over 180,000 hits at the DailyMail website.
Readers should understand that the Daily Mail/Mail
Online (and most other publishers) will publish articles that are
targeted toward a specific audience - including the audience’s
(willfully ignorant) “intelligence” level.
The source data for the “Global Warming Stopped”
headline is unknown. However, Global Warming Deniers are gullible,
scientifically ignorant fools who will believe any LIE as long as
it supports what they want to believe. Thus they fabricate a
mysterious temperature record and then point to this fabricated
temperature record as if it were true.
Evidence that Global Warming Deniers are Liars
The Mail Online/Daily Mail generously provides evidence that they
print lies. Here is a Print Screen copy from the Mail Online’s web
page on Sept. 19, 2013.
The Mail Online asserts “the fact that 1998 was the hottest year
on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it”.
If we check the world’s temperature databases we find that:
1) GISS/NASA shows that 2005, 2007, and 2010 were all warmer than
2) NOAA/NCDC shows that 2005 and 2010 were warmer than 1998.
3) HadCRUT4 shows that 2005 and 2010 were warmer than 1998.
4) And the UAH satellite temperature graph (above) shows that
global temperatures have been consistently above the 1998 moving
average for the last 14 years.
The Mail Online is lying again when it states that
1998 was the warmest year on record. Then they fabricated a claim
that there is a cover-up.
The top of this web page states that Global Warming
Deniers “lie, they are willfully ignorant, and they are wrong.”
The Mail Online is a perfect example demonstrating that Global
Warming Deniers are liars.
Willful Lie by David Rose & The Daily Mail/Mail Online
On March 16, 2013 The Daily Mail/Mail Online ran the
David Rose and The Daily Mail/Mail Online claim that
temperatures are not following the predictions made by the IPCC.
The graph has been widely circulated in the Global Warming Denier
Does the Daily Mail/Mail Online chart show what the
IPCC actually said, or is the Daily Mail/Mail Online chart a
fabrication of what the IPCC really said?
The chart above shows what the IPCC really printed in their 2007
The Daily Mail/Mail Online and David Rose willfully fabricated
still another lie.
David Rose is still
fabricating LIES in 2017
On Feb. 4, 2017 the following article by David Rose was published
on the Daily Mail website:
According to David Rose:
“A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper
that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it
published the sensational but flawed report”
The “whistleblower” was identified as John Bates – a retired NOAA
The report was a NOAA confirmation study that there was no “pause”
in global warming.
(The “no pause” in global warming was obvious two years ago:
“Global warming 'hiatus' never happened”
David Rose’s went on to say:
“It's not the first time we've exposed dodgy climate
data, which is why we've dubbed it: Climate Gate 2”
In reality, John Bates made no such claim. This is what John Bates
“no data tampering, no data changing, nothing malicious.”
“It's not trumped up data in any way shape or form.”
“Major global warming study again questioned, again defended”
Given all of the above, it is easy to conclude that David Rose
fits the category of “Pathological Liar”
“The fabricative tendency is chronic
It is not provoked by the immediate situation or social pressure
so much as it is an innate trait of the personality.”
The “Accuracy” of David Rose’s (and other deniers)
“Ice Age” Forecasts
Global Warming Deniers frequently claim (and/or
forecast) that the atmosphere is cooling instead of warming. Here
is one of David Rose’s “Fearless Forecasts” which (in 2010)
claimed that “The mini ice age starts here” and will likely ”last
for 20 or 30 years”.
Of course there were no “eminent climate scientists”
named in David Rose’s article. In 2010, no legitimate climate
scientist made such a forecast. David Rose just fabricated that
claim just like other Global Warming Deniers fabricate other
claims when they try to legitimatize their fabrications.
And how accurate was this forecast of a “mini ice age” “to last
for 20 or 30 years”?
The average global temperature set a new record high in 2010.
And this record high was broken by a new record high in 2014.
And this record high was broken by a new record high in 2015.
And this record high was broken by a new record high in 2016.
(And please check the temperature record in future years.)
Warming Denier Lie
As documented above, Global Warming Deniers are not above
fabricating false “reports”. Here’s the headline of another
“UN Hiding Reports About Inaccurate Global Warming Numbers”
This of course is not true, but the assertion needs to be
The “title” of the actual “report” is:
HOW THE IPCC HID THE GOOD NEWS ON
The content of the “Report” is actually Global
Warming Denier propaganda put out by “The Global Warming Policy
In turn the GWPF is a “Think Tank” headed by British
Politician Lord Lawson – who by an “amazing coincidence” is the
same Lord Nigel Lawson who was one of the people featured in
Martin Durkin’s pseudo-documentary “The Great Global Warming
Martin Durkin: “Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications
- are the bad guys”
The scientific validity of the “report” is zero.
“The Register” –
And Another Global Warming Denier LIE
“The Register” is another online Global Warming
Denier website – and similar to other Deniers, “The Register”
circulates typical GWD fabrications and lies. The Print Screen
images below were recorded on July 21, 2015.
The Print Screen image above records an article that
appeared on July 21, 2015 on the online website of “The Register”
The Register has fabricated a claim that Arctic sea ice cover has
returned to values seen in the 1980s. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/21/arctic_bounces_back_world_returns_to_sea_ice_levels_seen_in_1980s/
The claim is another Global Warming Denier LIE.
The Print Screen image above is from the National
Snow and Ice Data Center, and displays a graph showing Arctic sea
ice extent for every year in the 1980s – plus the first part of
2015. The graph can be interactively generated at http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
The top lines in the graph show Arctic sea ice extent
for every year from 1980 thru 1989. The lower line shows what has
happened so far in 2015. The Register’s claim that the “Arctic
BOUNCES BACK, world returns to sea ice cover seen in 1980s” is a
Global Warming Denier
Liar and/or Willful Ignoramus
“Wing Nut” media often promote “name” people to
promote Global Warming Denier ideology – mostly because the GWDs
don’t have any evidence - leaving “noise making” as their denial
weapon of choice. One of these people is the 80-year old John
Original source of the picture above was: “Prominent dingbat wants
to sue Al Gore for fraud” http://scholarsandrogues.com/2008/03/14/prominent-dingbat-wants-to-sue-al-gore-for-fraud/
John Coleman has minimal qualifications and no
evidence to back up his mistaken opinions. He has no educational
background in either meteorology or climatology. His degree is in
Just like P. T. Barnam (“I am a showman by
profession...and all the gilding shall make nothing else of me” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._T._Barnum
), Coleman’s “expertise” consists of entertaining the masses – not
His contribution as cofounder of the Weather Channel
lasted one year before he was forced out (more than 30 years ago)
by the other cofounder. (Due to major operating losses – Coleman
was CEO and president.) “Eventually, Landmark forced Coleman out
of TWC.” The falling out included a lawsuit which Coleman
(It appears that KUSI is trying to “vanish” this web page. If
anyone would like Print-Screen copies of what it used to look
like, please send me an email and I’ll attach the images to my
In regard to Coleman’s quote
“There is no significant man-made global warming at this time,
there has been none in the past”
perhaps John Coleman should take a vacation trip to visit the
(former) glaciers on the Matterhorn.
As for the Weather Channel itself:
“Accuweather” has the same conclusion.
“Global Warming has Not Stopped”
For more information on John Coleman, please see the Guardian
“Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman prefers conspiracies to
Most Global Warming Deniers tend to be willfully
ignorant and/or liars. Another applicable classification might be
“Certifiably Delusional”. The delusional category seems to fit
James Delingpole – who writes columns for wing-nut websites such
as breitbart.com, blogs.telegraph.co.uk, dailymail.co.uk, etc.
The above article was published by James Delingpole
in April 2012.
In the article, Delingpole tells us how Global
Cooling is going to take over the world. For example, the chart
above forecasts a sharp drop in temperatures for Hanover, NH. The
first of two sharp temperature plunges should have been in place
by the year 2015.
Well, 2015 showed a worldwide record jump upward in
temperatures. To date, Delingpole hasn’t explained “What went
For a historical 2010 view of Delingpole’s Global
Cooling obsession (Delingpole is convinced that there is Global
Cooling but it is being covered up by a world “Conspiracy”),
(In reality, 2010 set a new record for world warmth, until that
record was broken in 2014, until that record was broken in 2015 .
Delingpole also shows a complete ignorance when it comes to the
role and source of carbon dioxide.
Cliff: Ah, you know we’ve got, the greenies are all against cars
and the exhaust, and you know, all this pollution that we put in
the air. Ah, what’s the equivalency of a volcano that’s erupting
and spewing stuff into the air thirty miles high.
Delingpole: That’s a good question. You remember that volcano
that erupted in Iceland a couple of years ago?
Cliff: Yep, that’s the one that made me start thinking about it
Delingpole: Yeah, I think that, I think that that – that volcano
produced more CO2 than I think humans have produced in the last,
in the last fifty years.
In reality, human activities produce over 100 times
as much CO2 per year as volcanoes For example, please try to find
any volcano eruption (including Mount Pinatubo - the second
biggest Volcanic Eruption in the 20th century) on this CO2 graph.
Also please see: “It's official: a new Ice Age is on its way.”
June 15, 2011
Global Cooling and the New World Order By James Delingpole
Sept. 26, 2010
“that over a decade of global cooling such as that that we have
About Feb. 2012
“the act or practice of deceiving; concealment or distortion of
the truth for the purpose of misleading; duplicity; fraud;
On Nov. 30, 2016 Breitbart ran a story with the
headline “Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate
If you check the temperature charts shown earlier on
this web page, we see that in reality, global temperatures have
not plunged. In fact 2016 set another new record high in global
In the first paragraph of the story, Breitbart tries
to use “land temperatures” as a proxy for global temperatures. As
shown earlier on this page, land temperatures are subject to a
large amount of random variation. The land temperature chart shows
a steadily rising trend in temperatures, and the moving average is
making new record highs as of late 2016.
Upon further inspection, we see that the article was
authored by James Delingpole. (See the section above for more
information on the pathological lies of James Delingpole.)
Fraud and Deceit
by “Steven Goddard”
Steven Goddard (whose real name is Tony Heller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Goddard
) runs the realclimatescience dot com website. Goddard (Heller) is
another typical Global Warming Denier in that he uses deceit/fraud
to promote the denier agenda.
On March 7, 2016 he posted an article titled “NOAA Radiosonde Data
Shows No Warming For 58 Years”
The article included a fabricated graph that
allegedly implied that Radiosonde (Weather Balloon) data showed no
warming as compared to 58 years ago.
The picture above shows how Steven Goddard (real name
Tony Heller) combined two different graphs that measure two
different observation data sets to get a single graph. In
particular, note the words “I combined the two graphs”.
There are several examples of outright fraud in
Steven Goddard’s (real name Tony Heller) presentation.
1) The real complete radiosonde data set is available at ftp://ftp1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ratpac/ratpac-a/
. Why would anyone “combine the two graphs” when the real
single-source data set is available? Graphs for the real data were
shown earlier on this web page, and they show accelerating warming
for the entire period of record.
2) The left side of the graph that Steven Goddard (real name Tony
Heller) fabricated contains temperature data up to the 100 mb
level in the stratosphere. As shown earlier on this web page, the
100 mb level in the stratosphere is cooling as per global warming
models. Steven Goddard’s fabricated chart combines stratospheric
cooling (left side of Goddard's graph) with tropospheric warming
(right side of Goddard’s graph), and then he alleges “NOAA
Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years”.
Steven Goddard (real name Tony
Heller): “The earlier data showed as much pre-1979 cooling as
the post-1979 warming.”
3) The original chart that Steven Goddard (real name Tony Heller)
used was published in the Journal of the American Meteorological
Society, and was used to show short term variations in global
temperatures. This included normal brief cooling that follows
volcanic eruptions. Steven Goddard erased the labels for the Mt.
Agung and Fuego eruptions from his combined chart.
Summary: The heading on this web page states:
“Global Warming Deniers claim that Global Warming is a
hoax/fraud/scam. They lie, they are willfully ignorant, and they
Steven Goddard (real name Tony Heller) is still another example of
the fraud committed by Global Warming Deniers.
For more information about “off-the-reality-rails
rants” by Steven Goddard (real name Tony Heller), please see the
“New Lows: Sea Ice and “Steven Goddard” credibility”
“Symptom Of A Liar”
This guy “nails” the real Steven Goddard (real name Tony
6509 Quiet Hours
Columbia, MD 21045
Tel. (970) 460-6147
This appears to be a 704 sq. ft., “Bedford” unit in the HUD
subsidized (low income) “Chimneys of Cradlerock” complex. http://www.chimneysofcradlerock.com/apartments/communitymapdisplay.do?lid=en_US&pid=1825
6509 Quiet Hours Apt. 102 is near the top of the above map.
All of the above brings up the question of “why” do
Steven Goddard (real name Tony Heller) and many other Global
Warming Deniers go out of their way to reject reality. This
motivation may be answered by the following question:
Q: We might ask: What happens to someone who ends up being a
financial failure and wants to blame “The Conspiracy” for all of
1. not satisfied or content with currently prevailing conditions
2. dissatisfied with the existing government, administration,
3. a malcontent person, especially one who is chronically
discontented or dissatisfied..
Note: This is the same Steven Goddard (real name Tony Heller) who
is convinced that there is a “Conspiracy” that has turned
historical temperatures from “a 90 year cooling trend into a
Also please see:
“Denier Steven Goddard Makes Ass of Himself on Washington Post,
Confuses Sea Ice with a Glacier”
Lying isn’t limited to just television, newspaper,
and media. It also takes place in the U. S. Senate. The picture
below is an excerpt from the Congressional Record.
(Click on picture for a large image.)
The picture above shows Oklahoma’s Senator Jim Inhofe
lying, as documented in the Congressional Record. https://www.congress.gov/crec/2014/07/28/CREC-2014-07-28-pt1-PgS4988-2.pdf
Senator Jim Inhofe said:
“In fact, for the past 15
years temperatures across the globe have not increased. Let’s
think about that. Is anyone listening here? Temperatures have
not increased over the last 15 years.”
(If you follow the link, scroll down one page to get to page
Please check the NOAA/NCDC “1998 to Present” and “1999 to Present”
charts (shown earlier) to see what “the scientific record”
recorded for this time period.
Also, please see another example of a Global Warming Denier’s
assertion that Global Warming has stopped.
The Fabius Maximus Website is an example of a Global Warming
Denier website. A look at the evidence that GWDs lie, they are
willfully ignorant, and they are wrong.
Anatomy of Denial
From: Powell, James Lawrence. "The Inquisition of Climate
Science". Columbia University Press.Powell 2012, pp. 170–173 as
quoted from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial
Global warming deniers…. throw up
a succession of claims, and fall back from one line of defense
to the next as scientists refute each one in turn. Then they
The earth is not warming.
All right, it is warming but the Sun is the cause.
Well then, humans are the cause, but it doesn't matter, because
it warming will do no harm. More carbon dioxide will actually be
beneficial. More crops will grow.
Admittedly, global warming could turn out to be harmful, but we
can do nothing about it.
Sure, we could do something about global warming, but the cost
would be too great. We have more pressing problems here and now,
like AIDS and poverty.
We might be able to afford to do something to address global
warming some-day, but we need to wait for sound science, new
technologies, and geoengineering.
The earth is not warming. Global warming ended in 1998; it was
never a crisis.
How accurate are the computer models that are used to
forecast global warming? The chart below is from an in depth essay
on global warming at the American Institute for Physics. http://www.aip.org/history/climate/summary.htm
The top part of the chart shows actual observed
temperature anomalies vs. what the computer models produce. The
bottom part of the chart shows 4 primary components that are used
for the computer models. Volcanic eruptions and El Nino are
basically random events, and thus their short term fluctuations
cannot be predicted in advance. A good reference for tracking
current El Nino status is the Earth System Research Laboratory’s
web page at:
Solar irradiance varies slightly with the 11year
sunspot cycle. There is some variability in the length of the
cycle and its magnitude, but overall it has just a small influence
and irradiance has actually been negative in recent decades.
The largest influence is “Anthropogenic Effects” with
human generated carbon dioxide outweighing all other components.
With atmospheric carbon dioxide on a relentless climb, guess what
is going to happen to the earth’s temperature in the future?
Models Are Not Fundamentally Flawed”
As reported at:
“Fifteen-year temperature trends. The solid black line is the time
series of the global mean surface temperature, plotted as a
departure (anomaly) from a baseline period 1961–90. The dashed
black line is a smooth fit to this series, representing the
long-term warming rate. The blue and red lines are linear trends
for each 15-year segment running over 1850–64, 1851–65, …,
1999–2013. Each 15-year segment is shown in red if the trend rises
faster than the long-term warming rate in the same 15-year period
and blue if it rises more slowly. Marotzke and Forster show that
these 15-year trends are dominated by natural (free) variations.
The free variations drive the 15-year trends above and below the
long-term warming rate as they ride along with it. Courtesy:
Forcing, feedback and internal variability in global temperature
trends by Jochem Marotzke & Piers M. Forster published in
The best information about changes in the world’s climate can be
found in our best educational institutions.
The following organizations provide evidence that:
1) Global Warming / Climate Change is real.
2) Human activities are by far the largest causative agent.
3) Global Warming / Climate Change is a continuing, ongoing
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“Report: Human activity fuels global warming”
California Institute of Technology
“How We Know Global Warming is Real”
“The science behind human-induced climate change”
(If link is broken use:
“A large body of scientific information indicates that global
climate change is unequivocal, almost certainly is caused mostly
by human activities, is already causing significant harm, and as
it continues, holds great risks for our future.”
“The Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming”
“With higher CO2 concentrations come expectations of a stronger
greenhouse effect and therefore warmer global temperatures.”
Atmospheric Sciences - University of Illinois - Champaign
“Evidence continues to mount that human activities are altering
the Earth’s climate on a global scale.”
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Scripps Institution of Oceanography (University of California -
If global warming stopped in 1998, please provide an
explanation as to why our best schools and universities are
providing evidence that global warming is continuing.
The actual observations show that global warming
didn’t stop in 1998. What is happening is that a few Global
Warming Deniers fabricated a story, and the other members of the
Global Warming Denier cult continue to demonstrate their willful
ignorance by repeating the same false story.
Return to the Global Warming Deniers index page
Return to Durango Bill’s
Web page generated via Sea Monkey's Composer HTML editor
within a Linux Cinnamon Mint 18 operating system.