Before 2018 Becomes the “Newest” Warmest Year Ever…

by Steve MacDonald

Al_Gore_Fire bannerSpring is coming, followed by another summer, a time when it will probably be the hottest…it has been all year. And with that “heat” the hyperbolic declarations on Mann-Made warming–which is not to be confused with the Mann-Made cooling, bitter cold, and snow.

No matter how cold it gets, it’s always about warming. No one every says (insert year) was the coldest on record, because of Western privilege, CO2, blah, blah, blah. It’s always the warmest.

So with that in mind, let’s revisit something I wrote in 2016 that sums it all up.

In the progressive climate utopia, as with all progressive utopias, you are not permitted to question the governments anointed experts or their motivations. That’s not your job. Your job is to avoid phonics, do math with your emotions, and clap when Bernie says “free college tuition,” no questions asked.

Moving forward means never looking back, and this is of particular relevance when talking about the warmest whatever ever. Stick to the approved forms of communication. Do not question the data.

The experts in the Climate Cult will “call it in” to a willing media, and you will consume it. “Scientists report hottest Tuesday on record.” What you are not supposed to know is that it is the hottest Tuesday on record…since last Wednesday.

Plenty more here, plus pictures and graphs that will mean nothing to the Climate Cult because nothing matters except the narrative.

Leave a Comment

  • Bruce Currie

    Yet another post filled with random facts about climate that fit an ideologue’s narrative, but that fails to provide a full and accurate picture of climate change over the eons, let alone honestly account for the present warming. The fact the planet has been warmer at times in the distant past has little to no bearing on the present warming. The current warming is the direct result of the release of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels.

    We humans are over-riding the temperate inter-glacial period that has encompassed all of recorded human history, and that would otherwise be a slight and gradual cooling into an eventual new glacial period some time in the next 2 to 5 thousand years. Past climate changes were initiated by the Milankovitch Cycles–changes in Earth’s orbital eccentricity, tilt, and wobble, that coincide over long-term time scales. The present warming is real, it’s clearly due to human activity, and it’s very likely going to create problems on a scale and at a pace that may overwhelm our ability to cope. And it’s all coming soon–perhaps sooner than many scientists thought just a few years ago. There’s probably still time to ameliorate some of the worse effects, but so far we seem to be on course for warming that’s on the high end of current projections. For more factual information, see here: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

    • Coming soon, so soon it’s at least a decade behind Algore’s predictions, but that didn’t stop the old charlatan from selling “carbon indulgences” to anybody, especially wannabe-green corporations, and pulling in a very respectable profit with which to pay for his own high carbon lifestyle.

      Research? S Fred Singer on many millennia of warming and cooling cycles, Roy Spencer on the real global thermostat – water vapor, meticulous studies linking cosmic rays with cloud formation, and linking variations in the solar wind with the quantity and energy of cosmic rays which make it to Earth, predictions of a cool and quiet sun this century which may result in far more cooling than the Maunder Minimum/ Little Ice Age.

      Many of us are voracious readers of background research on this stuff, and have little time for the high priests of Mann-made doom.

      Right about now, I’d say it would be a better bet to stockpile coal for future need, than for Algore to venture into Polar Bear habitat with his certain knowledge that they are extinct and he is thus safe. Hmmm feeding high priests to the bears – has some appeal 🙂

      • Bruce Currie

        Consider the sources: Before he was the grandfather of climate science deniers, Singer was a mouthpiece for the tobacco industry whose “fake science” claims the fossil-fuels industry adapted for their own campaign, designed to sow doubt and confusion about global warming among the public.

        Roy Spencer is that rare denier with real climate science credentials, but whose scientific work has been error-prone. Spencer claimed his and John Christy’s work with satellite data on temperature showed little to no cooling. They subsequently had to retract that claim, after finding errors in their research that, instead, confirmed the same extent of warming as measured by land-based systems. Along with AGW, Spencer also doesn’t believe in the theory of evolution.

        Water vapor is the principal greenhouse gas, but no convincing research has been done to show it is responsible for the present warming. Likewise, cosmic rays have also been ruled out by scientific findings as a possible explanation. Increasing greenhouse gases is the best explanation for the present warming.

        • Except there isn’t any. (Warming)
          Water vapor is a negative feedback (regulating) phenomenon with somewhat of a lag to it, and several influencing factors to cloud formation, including dust and aerosols (volcanic eruptions) and cosmic rays (triggering condensation nuclei).

          Notwithstanding all the fuss about CO2, current concentrations are much lower than many periods in history, and we a re still at greater risk from the “quiet sun” than we are from Human activity.

          Thinking of human activity, while some nations (Spain, Germany as top examples) waste money on part time power, America evolves by cleaning up coal and switching to oil and natural gas, with the latter having both cost and environmental advantages.
          Lo and behold, as China’s economy evolves, we see a movement toward cleaner burning fuels – richer societies can afford to care about the environment.
          Instead of driving for a no-energy economy, let us celebrate capitalism and innovation as we gradually use less energy for more people and more productivity. Capitalism loves efficiency, and that is where the environment wins, too – less waste heat, less pollution, recycled materials…

          As for “Scientists,” I’ll place my faith in Singer, Spencer, Bastardi, McIntyre and McKittrick, Bjorn Lomborg and more, over data manipulators like Meltdown Mann, James Hansen, and that railroad engineer from the IPCC. Especially over Algore who personally profits from the scam.

          • PS

            It’s been a great way to while away a long plane ride winding you up 😉

          • Bruce Currie

            So much misinformation…so little time.

          • Bruce Currie

            The only climate scientist on your list is Spencer. No wonder you claim with a straight face that “there isn’t any. Warming.” And your claim that ‘Capitalism loves efficiency” is undercut by the carbon footprint of fracked natural gas, which is likely far larger than claimed. Your claim of a trend toward greater efficiency is also undercut by the drive to utilize tar sands. Instead, it smacks of late-stage desperation on the part of fossil fueled “Capitalism”.

            “When methane emissions are included, the greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas is significantly larger than that of conventional natural gas, coal, and oil. Because of the increase in shale gas development over recent years, the total greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use in the USA rose between 2009 and 2013, despite the decrease in carbon dioxide emissions.”
            https://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/publications/f_EECT-61539-perspectives-on-air-emissions-of-methane-and-climatic-warmin_100815_27470.pdf

          • That assumes methane is released, not burned, and now, the decrease in CO2 emissions is just small change?

  • 175jfs

    When Yanet Garcia talks about the weather people listen. Currie . . . . zzzzzzzzzz. Now that’s a fact

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e09600e36554fd9c53f9c9b53ceb247c05efd963017781125ddba92880091319.jpg

    • Bruce Currie

      Maybe you should consider changing your handle to “Luke A. Squirrel”? Or “T and A.”? : )

      • 175jfs

        If she sold climate change it would be a winner. You . . . you bore your audience. If you didn’t have captive audience, you’d have none.
        Progressives have learned nothing.

  • Jim Johnson

    Problem is Gore’s previous man induced prophecies have been complete washouts. Yet, Al Gore has made millions blaming mankind with ridiculous and terrifying hyperbole. Here’s a couple of examples:
    1.) Rising Sea Levels – inaccurate and misleading. Al was even discovered
    purchasing a beachfront mansion
    2.) The Earth Would be in a “True Planetary Emergency” Within a Decade Unless Drastic Action Taken to Reduce Greenhouse Gasses – never happened
    3.) Melting Arctic – false – 2015 represents the largest refreezing in years.
    4.) Polar Bear Extinction – actually they are increasing!
    humansarefree.com/2018/01/al-gores-10-global-warming-predictions.html
    Back to Al Gore, Al Gore has toughened his climate change rhetoric saying that there is a need to “punish climate-change deniers” and that politicians should pay a price for rejecting “accepted science.”
    http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/4487/20150318/al-gore-seeks-punish-climate-change-deniers.htm
    Deniers beware of big brother’s wrath! Al Gore, Liberal Democrat, purveyor of fractured fairytales.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b5fddb38d3d926e2fa6de851f9e8be761ced0191416a09a9024f5ca33dbb1725.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d4794a56941330f338efaf66d2fed52ee52eb5bd3633f05b560b052babf29020.png

    • Bruce Currie

      If you took the time to examine each of your claims in detail, and not simply parrot what you read from a fossil-fuel industry shill, you’d discover the distortions and half-truths behind each of the claims.

      Taking just one of your claims: “2015 represents the largest refreezing in years”: Not quite. This link shows vividly the decline in age, and extent, of Arctic ice. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2510/see-how-arctic-sea-ice-is-losing-its-bulwark-against-warming-summers/

      • Is Hansen gone yet, and do you trust the folks still at NASA more than Hansen?

        • Bruce Currie

          I did then, and do now. There are many research institutions in this country and elsewhere that study the Arctic environment. If misleading information was being published, there are many who would call it out. The question you ask is exactly what the deniers’ lobby intends with their campaign: to sow doubt and confusion. Healthy skepticism is good–it’s part of the scientific method. False claims of rampant fraud are intended to undermine confidence in the science. Even a cursory examination of deniers’ lobby practices shows they routinely cherry-pick and manipulate the facts to distort the truth about global warming.

  • The Mann-made warming fanatics have a problem – their skeletons are escaping from the closet:
    http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/michael-e-mann-hocky-stick.jpg

    • Bruce Currie

      Odd then that Mann’s research on the past temperature record has been replicated and refined–not refuted– by a number of studies.

  • Jim Johnson

    Bruce, let’s analyze 1.) Rising Sea Levels – inaccurate and misleading. Al was even discovered purchasing a beachfront mansion.
    Why would Al Gore purchase ocean front property if significant rising tides is such a serious threat? I have included 4 pictures Albert “Alphonse Capone” Gore grandiose compound. Al has called for the “punishment” of (liberal labeled) “climate change deniers”.
    No, Mann’s research on past temperature records were refuted by several studies., thus the numbers were adjusted to represent actual not wrongly prophesied apocalypse.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/19af99de25f5060b1598d1634b8f05943f0b4811981d495f00fbebe9881b6af5.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3503bc853434f5d37cbd8f0ab843ed61a3d6f1c269ab8e35e91be6fadcd213b5.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/747bf495c063f46a319de5ec3fbfcaf2b40d72adc87dc650853ea73c315bf226.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c1456408503a4ef323437981cd71bf7996b66f037e4dd087eb201d628364eecd.jpg

    • Bruce Currie

      Your claim regarding Mann and the “hockey stick” is not accurate. His work was not “refuted by several studies”. Just the opposite in fact:

      “An independent assessment of Mann’s hockey stick was conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007). They reconstructed temperatures employing a variety of statistical techniques (with and without principal components analysis). Their results found slightly different temperatures in the early 15th Century. However, they confirmed the principal results of the original hockey stick – that the warming trend and temperatures over the last few decades are unprecedented over at least the last 600 years.

      “While many continue to fixate on Mann’s early work on proxy records, the science of paleoclimatology has moved on. Since 1999, there have been many independent reconstructions of past temperatures, using a variety of proxy data and a number of different methodologies. All find the same result – that the last few decades are the hottest in the last 500 to 2000 years (depending on how far back the reconstruction goes).”
      https://www.skepticalscience.com/broken-hockey-stick.htm
      https://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x-6

    • Bruce Currie

      Gore is an easy target here, but it doesn’t alter the fact sea level is rising. Gore’s purchase of ocean front property is no different from that of other squillionaires, for whom GG routinely carries water (no pun intended). Presumably, his property is well above the amount of sea level rise forecast by the end of the century. Nice effort at deflection though.

  • Jim Johnson

    Oh, I see when predictions of a cataclysmic consequence are not validated by the science well just reconstruct the temperatures? No deflection, I guess $9 million Gore spent is just crumbs, his rhetoric does not jive with his grandiose rising sea level predictions.

Previous post:

Next post: