i

Durango Bill’s
Debunking the Deniers of Global Warming


The “Global Warming Stopped in 1998” Lie

Global Warming Deniers claim that Global Warming is a hoax/fraud/scam.
They lie, they are willfully ignorant, and they are wrong.


“Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced.”
http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts/key-findings


   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 observations.



The Actual Temperature Record


The actual temperature record and the 97% consensus.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus



The temperature record starting with 1975

   The graph above shows the actual global temperature anomalies as compiled by NOAA/NCDC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration / National Climate Data Center -  http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ ) from 1975 to Aug. 2014. Individual months, a 25 month centered moving average, and a least squares trend line are shown. The graph uses data that can be found at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php

 The moving average (yellow line) shows that new record high global temperatures were set through at least Aug. 2014.

Note: NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) maintains the world's largest climate data archive.

   One of the features that can be seen is a temperature spike that showed up in 1998. Late 1997 / 1998 was characterized by an abnormally strong El Nino event in the equatorial Pacific Ocean.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1997_El_Nino_TOPEX.jpg  The equatorial Pacific Ocean covers a lot of geography with the result that this local event skewed average world temperatures upward for several months.

   If you want to use calendar years as your measurement tool, then the NOAA/NCDC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration /National Climatic Data Center) data shows that 2005 broke the 1998 average for record warmth. Then 2010 broke the record again. And it appears likely that 2014 will 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

   It is interesting to note that by 2014 the major “all-time record warmth” temperature spike that occurred in 1998 has become just your normal “everyday” anomaly. As we go into the future, we can expect a series of additional new all-time record warmth spikes that become just your normal “everyday” anomalies a decade or two later. 

   Global Warming Deniers frequently try to misrepresent what is happening by “Cherry Picking” data such that the time period that they quote highlights short term random events. The purpose of the Cherry Picking is to use short term random events to obscure longer term trends. They selectively pick their “starting point” at a temperature spike and compare the spike with more recent average temperatures. They then claim that there hasn’t been any temperature change from the spike to the current average – thus the claim “Global Warming has stopped”



Least Squares Trend Lines

   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 temperature record starting in January 1996.

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 chart.)


The temperature record starting in January 1998.

The chart above shows the temperature record and a least squares trend line with the time period beginning in Jan. 1998.


The temperature record starting in January 1999.

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.

NOAA/NCDC temperatures for 1975 thru 1997

   If you use the above trend line to make a temperature anomaly forecast for the 1998 to 2014 period, what would you expect? Would you expect temperature anomalies to cluster around the 0.60 level? Now look at the preceding charts. What actually happened?

   Please compare the trend line that just uses the Jan. 1975 thru Dec. 1997 data (shown above) with the trend line that uses the Jan. 1975 thru Aug. 2014 data (first chart). The upward slope of the two trend lines is almost identical. About the only way that you can tell that there is a slight difference is to compare the left portion of the trend lines vs. the yellow 25 month centered moving average. (For the periods involved, the 25 month centered moving average is identical for the two graphs.)

   The upward trend is the same whether you include the Jan. 1998 to Aug. 2014 data or whether you omit it. If the average temperature for Jan. 1998 to Aug. 2014 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 Jan. 1998 thru Aug. 2014 period turned out to be exactly what the trend line forecast.

Global Warming did not stop in 1998.




Land Only vs. Land/Sea Temperatures

   Finally, it is interesting to compare the temperature record for “land only” areas vs. the combination of land and ocean areas. Traditionally, the temperature series that are used for most global warming charts use “land/sea” temperatures, but we can get a better understanding of what is happening if we also look at the “land only” temperature record.

   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 change in temperature that involves the massive volume of the oceans. It is therefore useful to look at “land only” temperatures that are less influenced by the lag effect of the oceans.

The "Land Only" temperature record.

   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

   If you compare this chart with the first chart above, 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 an oceanic area such as Hawaii.

   Of greater significance, the rate of temperature rise for “Land Only” is double the rate that is seen in the land/sea chart. 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 as shown by the trend line is 1.4 degrees C in 45 years which is 5.6 degrees F per century.

   Finally, the 25 month centered moving average (yellow line) shows that the average temperature starting with 2005 has been warmer than what was seen earlier in the 2000s never mind anything before year 2000.

   In the last few years, there has been 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 has caused oceanic areas 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.



The Satellite Temperature Record

   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.

   The University of Alabama – Huntsville uses NASA’s satellites to monitor global temperatures. The graph below shows what has been observed up through June 2014.

Global temperature anomalies as measured by satellites.

The data source for the above graph is the “Globe” column at:
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

It would be of interest as to just how Global Warming Deniers define their claim that “Global Warming Stopped in 1998”.



Ocean Heating

   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.

A measurement of the heat going into the Earth's Oceans

   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 at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50382/full

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 ~= 0.94845 BTU)

Earlier measurements of the heat going into the oceans.   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:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2009.php

   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 component.

   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 Ocean Heat Content graph updated to June 2013.

   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 system.
http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/About_Argo.html

   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.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/4-Hiroshima-bombs-worth-of-heat-per-second.html
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Boy for the 67E12 Joules heat content of one of these bombs.)

Ocean Heat Content and warming rate as measured by the Argo buoy system.

   The graph above shows the Ocean Heat Content as measured by the Argo buoy system (red line in the previous graph) up through June 2014. (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 warming.

As of June 2014 the warming rate is:
9.3E21 Joules per year
= 4.4 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs per second
= 2.9 trillion 100-watt light bulbs running 24/7.
= 420 100-watt light bulbs for each of the 7,000,000,000 people on planet earth -
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 even steeper.


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/  Ocean currents in the Pacific Ocean are known to undergo small changes depending on the positive or negative state of the PDO.


The PDO Index starting with 975

  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 before 1975.

   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 it.)

   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 going.



Radiative Forcing

    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 industrial revolution.

   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 components of radiative forcing.

   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.

   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 equilibrium.



Other Confirming Observations that Global Warming is Continuing


The world's glaiers are melting.

   The chart above (compiled by the World Glacier Monitoring Service) 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. For an updated version of the graph, please see the mass balance studies at http://www.geo.uzh.ch/microsite/wgms/

   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:

“The total glacier area of 7,090 glaciers has decreased from 13,363.5 km2 to 12,130.7 km2 in the period between the 1970s and 2000s.” http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n9/extref/nclimate1580-s1.pdf (Page 3)

    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:
“Science News”
“Study: Mount Everest losing its cloak of ice and snow as world warms”
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2013/05/13/Study-Mount-Everest-losing-its-cloak-of-ice-and-snow-as-world-warms/UPI-90911368491160/?spt=hs&or=sn

and

Also please see:
“Multi-decadal mass loss of glaciers in the Everest area (Nepal Himalaya) derived from stereo imagery”
http://www.the-cryosphere.net/5/349/2011/tc-5-349-2011.pdf
“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 0.320.08mw.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?
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/grace20120208.html

If global warming stopped in 1998, what melted 4.3 trillion tons of ice?



Argentina’s 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 taken photographs.

The Upsala Glacier in 2003

The picture above shows the Upsala Glacier as of May 11, 2003.


The Upsala Glacier as of 2011

   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?




Alaska’s Columbia Glacier

   The first two pictures below are from Time/NASA’s time lapse video.
http://world.time.com/timelapse/

Alaska's Columbia Glacier as of 1998

   The first picture shows Alaska’s Columbia Glacier as of 1998. (The glacier is just to the left of the center of the picture.) Open water is dark blue. Snow and ice are white.


Alaska's Columbia Glacier as of 2012

   This next picture shows the Columbia Glacier as of 2012. Note how the former white area of the glacier has been replaced by dark blue ocean water.


   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 line.)

A Google Earth measurement of the Columbia Glacier's retreat

If Global Warming stopped in 1998, what melted 11 miles of the Columbia Glacier after 1998?




Sea Level is Rising


Sea Level is Rising




Sea level is rising.

   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 rate of sea level rise has quadrupled since the 1870 to 1924 period.

   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 quadrupled since the 1870 to 1924 period.


If global warming stopped in 1998, what is causing sea level to rise?



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 video.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide via NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory

   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?




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 headline:

“Global warming stopped 16 years ago,
reveals Met Office report quietly released...
and here is the chart to prove it”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

   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 evidence.

The story included the following chart:

The Mail Online's fabricated chart

In reality:
“Firstly, the Met Office has not issued a report on this issue.”
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/tag/climate-research-unit/
Alternately
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/
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 Weller”.

    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.

The actual HadCrut4 temperature data.

   The graph above shows the Hadley Climate Research Unit’s monthly temperature anomalies from 1975 to June 2014.  The data can be accessed and checked for accuracy at
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4-gl.dat
(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 12 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 organization.

   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:

UFOs
Over 19,000 hits about UFOs at the Daily Mail website.
Over 19,000 hits at the DailyMail website.

Bigfoot
Over 180,000 hits about "Bigfoot" at the Daily Mail website.
Over 180,000 hits at the DailyMail website.

etc.

   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.



“Red Handed” 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.

Lies by the Mail Online

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 1998.
     http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

2) NOAA/NCDC shows that 2005 and 2010 were warmer than 1998.
     ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/annual.land_ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat

3) HadCRUT4 shows that 2005 and 2010 were warmer than 1998.
     http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4-gl.dat

4) And the UAH satellite temperature graph (above) shows that global temperatures have been consistently above the 1998 moving average for the last 12 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.




Still Another Willful Lie by David Rose & The Daily Mail/Mail Online


Another fabricated lie by the Mail Online

   On March 16, 2013 The Daily Mail/Mail Online ran the above chart.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html

   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 blogosphere.

   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?


What the IPCC really said

The chart above shows what the IPCC really printed in their 2007 report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf  (Page 98)

The Daily Mail/Mail Online and David Rose willfully fabricated still another lie.




Another Global Warming Denier Lie


As documented above, Global Warming Deniers are not above fabricating false “reports”. Here’s the headline of another example:

“UN Hiding Reports About Inaccurate Global Warming Numbers”
http://www.designntrend.com/articles/11478/20140308/un-hiding-reports-about-inaccurate-global-warming-numbers.htm

This of course is not true, but the assertion needs to be debunked.


The “title” of the actual “report” is:

OVERSENSITIVE
HOW THE IPCC HID THE GOOD NEWS ON
GLOBAL WARMING

   The content of the “Report” is actually Global Warming Denier propaganda put out by “The Global Warming Policy Foundation”.
http://www.thegwpf.org/
http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2014/02/Oversensitive-How-The-IPCC-hid-the-Good-News-on-Global-Warming.pdf

   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 Swindle”.
http://www.thegwpf.org/who-we-are/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle

Martin Durkin: “Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications - are the bad guys”

The scientific validity of the “report” is zero.




Global Warming Models

   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

Observed temperature anomalies vs. wat the computer models produce.

   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:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/

   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?




Our Best Knowledge

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 phenomenon.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“Report: Human activity fuels global warming”
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/climate.html

California Institute of Technology
“How We Know Global Warming is Real”
“The science behind human-induced climate change”
http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~tapio/papers/skeptic_2008.pdf

Stanford University
“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.”
https://pangea.stanford.edu/programs/outreach/climatechange/

Columbia University
“The Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming”
“With higher CO2 concentrations come expectations of a stronger greenhouse effect and therefore warmer global temperatures.”
http://www.columbia.edu/~vjd1/greenhouse.htm

Atmospheric Sciences - University of Illinois - Champaign
“Evidence continues to mount that human activities are altering the Earth’s climate on a global scale.”
http://www.atmos.uiuc.edu/research/01climate.html

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
http://www.whoi.edu/main/topic/global-warming

Scripps Institution of Oceanography (University of California - San Diego)
http://scripps.ucsd.edu/img/climate_flyer.pdf

  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.



Conclusion

   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 home page


Web page generated via KompoZer