One of the false claims that Global Warming
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 year 2015 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. 2015.
Data source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global
The year 2015 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. 2015.
Data source: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif
The year 2015 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 2015 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 2015 set an all-time temperature record as measured by
Berkeley Earth Analysis.
Data source: http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2015-Hottest-Year-BE-Press-Release-v1.0.pdf
And what do the Global Warming Deniers say about this record warmth?
Temperature records can’t be trusted because:
It’s a conspiracy.
Then and now photographs of melting glaciers can’t be trusted because:
See “Melting Alaska makes the
Videos of high tides flooding Miami can’t be trusted because:
See “Miami Beach Sea Level
Also see: “Miami Beach’s battle to stem
that is not part of our “Alternate Reality” can’t be
The graph above shows the actual global
anomalies as compiled by NOAA/NCDC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration / National Climate Data Center - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/
) from 1975 to April 2016. Individual months, a 25 month centered
average, a least squares trend line, and 10-year warming rates
are shown. The graph uses data
that can be found at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
Slope (green line) = 0.170 degrees C. warming per decade.
The moving average (yellow line) shows that new record
high global temperatures were set through at least April 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
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 may very well 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
The red line in the above chart shows short term
warming rates in degrees per decade. Technically, it shows the 10-year,
least squares slope ending at the plot position.
The short term slope is subject to volcanic eruptions, El Nino/La Nina
conditions, and/or ordinary random statistical noise. Global Warming
Deniers will pick out the low points in this warming rate and claim
that global warming has stopped, and/or global warming has paused,
and/or global warming is in a hiatus, and/or global warming doesn’t
exist, etc. When you look at the larger picture, it is obvious that
these short term fluctuations are just a part of a longer term upward
Global Warming Deniers “Cherry Pick” the low
points in the short term trend, and then claim that these short term
low points “prove” that global warming doesn’t exist. The purpose of
the Cherry Picking is to use short term random events to obscure longer
Least Squares Trend Lines
When statisticians want to discern a trend from
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
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
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
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 chart.)
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
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
Global Warming Didn’t Stop in 1998.
1975 thru 1997 Trend Line had it Right
It is interesting to compare a future forecast
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.
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
Slope = 0.158 degrees C. warming per decade.
If you use the above trend line to make a
anomaly forecast for the 1998 to 2016 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 uses just the
thru Dec. 1997 data (shown above) with the trend line that uses the
Jan. 1975 thru April 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 April
2016 data or whether you omit it. If the average temperature for Jan.
1998 to April 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 April 2016 period turned out to be
almost identical to what was forecast by the earlier data.
Global Warming did not stop in 1998.
vs. Oceanic Temperatures
It is interesting to compare the temperature
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.
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 oceans.
Slope = 0.321 degrees C. warming per decade.
The chart above shows the Northern Hemisphere
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 = 0.126 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
“Land Only” is several times faster than what is seen 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 0.32
degrees C per decade which is 5.8 degrees F per century.
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
The years 2011 – 2013 were characterized by an
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
oceans, it looks like global warming may have actually accelerated
since the year 2000.
The graph above shows the amount of heat energy
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)
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”
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
The vast majority of the heat imbalance due to
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
determine (or measure) where the heat from thermal forcing ends up. In
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 system.
It can be easily calculated that the increase in
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
for the 67E12 Joules heat content of one of these bombs.)
The graph above shows the Ocean Heat Content as
by the Argo buoy system (red line in the previous graph) up through
Mar 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 warming.
As of Dec. 2015 the warming rate is:
1.08E22 Joules per year
= 5.1 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs per second
= 3.43 trillion 100-watt light bulbs running 24/7.
= 490 100-watt light bulbs for each of the 7,000,000,000 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 even
Conclusion: Global Warming did not stop in 1998.
PDO and the Rate of Atmospheric Temperature Rise
The rate that atmospheric temperatures rise is a
function that includes all possible components. One of these components
is the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. A detailed description of
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 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
The PDO appears to be a way of measuring the
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
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,
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
the PDO is in. The PDO just controls where the heat is going.
Satellite Temperature Record
Satellites can measure “brightness” microwave
which can be translated into temperatures. What the satellites lack in
surface detail is offset by their ability to quickly observe the whole
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 . .
The University of Alabama – Huntsville uses NASA’s
satellites to monitor global temperatures. The graph below shows what
has been observed up through Feb. 2016.
Slope = 0.148 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”.
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 periods.
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
“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.”
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:
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
More technical explanations of satellite observational problems can be
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 see http://www.skepticalscience.com/Satellite-record-vs-thermometers.htm
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.
Spencer’s “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/
and “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
Slope = 0.119 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 Nazis” conspiracy.
. . . But then again, what would you expect from someone whose
“scientific methodology” is:
finally became convinced that the theory of creation actually had a
much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution”
“The Evolution Crisis”
For more information, please see:
YALE Climate Connections
“How Reliable are Satellite Temperatures?”
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”
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,
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
above sea level.) Data source: 100 mb column in the Globe section at: http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ratpac/ratpac-a/RATPAC-A-annual-levels.txt
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
It would appear that some of the serious problems of the “Republicans'
favorite climate chart” include WILLFUL MISREPRESENTATION OF THE DATA.
Definition of FRAUD
1 a : DECEIT, TRICKERY; specifically
: intentional perversion of truth in order to induce
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;
: one who
defrauds : CHEAT
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 cool.”
“Christy has been wrong for decades”
the years, Spencer and Christy developed a reputation for making serial
mistakes that other scientists have been forced to uncover.”
(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 troposphere.)
chart above shows temperature anomalies at the 850 mb level as
measured by weather balloons
(Radiosonde Atmospheric Temperature Products for Accessing Climate
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
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. (Lower Troposphere)
The description for the above charts can be found at:
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
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”.)
can be seen in the charts, weather balloon data confirms that Global
Warming didn’t stop in 1998.
actual temperature record vs. projections/forecasts by the real models
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 are wrong.”
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
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 journalism), etc.
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
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 expected.
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
Human activities have changed the earth’s ability
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
“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
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
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
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
) and nitrogen (N2
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,
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
Switzerland’s World Glacier Monitoring Service
The chart above shows what is happening to the
glaciers. They are melting! Not only are
glaciers shrinking, the shrinkage rate has accelerated in recent years.
As for the false claims by the Deniers that
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
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 warms”
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
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 of ice?
Upsala Glacier 2003 to 2011
The Upsala Glacier is one of the larger outflow
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 picture above shows the Upsala Glacier as of May 11, 2003.
The picture above shows the Upsala Glacier as of
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 Time/NASA’s
time lapse video.
The first picture shows Alaska’s Columbia Glacier
1998. (The glacier is just to the left of the center of the picture.)
Open water is
dark blue. Snow and ice are white.
This next picture shows the Columbia Glacier as of
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
the same area. Google Earth’s distance measuring tool has been used to
show that the glacier has melted back 11 miles. (Yellow line.)
If Global Warming stopped in 1998, what melted 11 miles of the Columbia
Glacier after 1998?
Sea Ice Extent
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
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
(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 years
[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 Southern Ocean.”
If Global Warming stopped in 1998, why has sea ice extent accelerated
its downtrend – including a new record low in 2012?
Addendum: Data through Feb. 2016 shows that Arctic sea ice extent is
making new record lows.
Also Antarctic sea ice extent is slightly below the “0” level.
Sea Level is Rising
The chart above shows what is happening to sea
the world warms, sea level rises due to thermal expansion plus water
from melted glacial ice. The most recent data at
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 rise?
Island 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.
to sea level rise and subsidence, there is nothing left standing.
(Click on image for a large version)
A 2013 Google Earth view of the Holland Island
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
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
years. (See “Eemian interglacial” in the next section
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 _ _ _ –
The process of abandonment will be gradual salt
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.
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
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 is a marsh – but it’s 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
“just muddy water”.
Ditto for New Orleans.
Ditto for Miami.
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.
The near vertical line at the right end of the
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
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?
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.
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?
Typical Example of a GWD “Source” for the “Stopped” Lie
On Oct. 13, 2012 a British Global Warming Denier
(the “Mail Online”) ran a story with the following headline:
warming 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
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:
“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
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
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
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)
of interest. It shows that average temperatures beginning in
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 15+ years averaged warmer than what was
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
contributed work to the Daily Mail/Mail Online. The suspicion arises
that Ben Weller has widened his repertoire to include fabricating
As for the Daily Mail’s/Mail Online’s
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
(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”
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.
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.
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.
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
last 14 years.
The Mail Online is lying again when it states that
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
Deniers “lie, they are willfully ignorant, and they are wrong.” The
Mail Online is a perfect example demonstrating that Global Warming
Deniers are liars.
Another Willful Lie by David Rose & The Daily Mail/Mail Online
On March 16, 2013 The Daily Mail/Mail Online ran
the above chart.
David Rose and The Daily Mail/Mail Online claim
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
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
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”
This of course is not true, but the assertion needs to be debunked.
The “title” of the actual “report” is:
HOW THE IPCC HID THE GOOD NEWS ON
The content of the “Report” is actually Global
Denier propaganda put out by “The Global Warming Policy Foundation”.
In turn the GWPF is a “Think Tank” headed by
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”.
Martin Durkin: “Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications -
are the bad guys”
The scientific validity of the “report” is zero.
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 LIE.
Individual Global Warming Denier
Liar and/or Willful Ignoramus
“Wing Nut” media often promote “name” people to
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 Coleman.
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
back up his mistaken opinions. He has no educational background in
either meteorology or climatology. His degree is in Journalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)
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
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 apparently lost.
(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 reply.)
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 article:
“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
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 wrong”.
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”), please see:
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.
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
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. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/full.html
Also please see: “It's official: a new Ice Age is on its way.” June 15,
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
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 http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ratpac/ratpac-a/RATPAC-A-annual-levels.txt
. 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
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
Steven Goddard (real name
Tony Heller): “The earlier data showed as much pre-1979 cooling as the
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 are wrong.”
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.
A detailed look at the floor plan for this
apartment (as of 5/1/2016)
shows that it is “Available”. It’s seems likely that Steven Goddard
(real name Tony Heller) may have moved somewhere else in the last few
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 their problems?
1. not satisfied or content with currently prevailing conditions or
2. dissatisfied with the existing government, administration, system,
3. a malcontent person, especially one who is chronically discontented
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 warming trend”.
Lying Political Leaders
Lying isn’t limited to just television, newspaper,
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 S4989.)
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.
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
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 start over:
The earth is not warming.
All right, it is warming but the Sun is the cause.
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.
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
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
How accurate are the computer models that are used
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
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”
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?
Climate 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 Nature,
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”
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 - San
If global warming stopped in 1998, please provide an
as to why our best schools and universities are providing evidence that
global warming is continuing.
The actual observations show that global warming
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