My Gift To Climate Alarmists

Alarmist Heat Wave Chart Shown vs Underlying Data

US Wildfires as Presented by Alarmists vs Actual Data

Please compare the right hand portion of the above chart with the lower half of the heat wave chart to see the actual correlation.

Arctic Sea Ice Extent

US Sea Level Since 1920

US Sea Level Since 1850

Waverly Ohio

Climate Fraud Tool

Tony Heller devised software to automatically pick the perfect start date for climate alarmists to use to portray what they want.

"Most scientists are keeping their mouths shut because they they have to. They would lose their career and income if they didn't."
"Adults won't take climate change seriously. So we, the youth, are forced to strike."
"The Green New Deal reads like the communist manifesto".

Redistribute the World's Wealth by Climate Policy

The climate change activists will of course claim that such statements are out of context.
I agree they likely are. But the brainwashing of kids isn't.

Flashback 1989

Entire nations could be wiped off the earth by 2000.
Visit Real Climate Science for more information.
Heller shows some of the tricks alarmists use, but what about the actual long-term data?

Global Warming Swindle

William Land describes the actual underlying data for thousands of years in the "Great Global Warming Swindle".

UN IPCC Scientist Debunks UN IPCC Lies

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) is misleading humanity about climate change and sea levels, a leading expert on sea-level who served on the UN IPCC told The New American. In fact, it is more likely that sea-levels will decline, not rise, explained Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, the retired head of the paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University. A new solar-driven cooling period is not far off, he said. But when Mörner tried to warn the UN IPCC that it was publishing false information that would inevitably be discredited, they simply ignored him. And so, dismayed, he resigned in disgust and decided to blow the whistle.

Asked if coastal cities such as Miami would be flooding due to sea-level rise caused by alleged man-made global warming, Mörner was unequivocal: “Absolutely not.” “There is no rapid sea-level rise going on today, and there will not be,” he said, citing the observable data. “On the contrary, if anything happens, the sea will go down a little.” The widely respected scientist, who has been tracking sea levels in various parts of the globe for some 50 years, blasted those who use incorrect “correction factors” in their data to try to make it appear that the seas are rising worldwide. That is just wrong, he said.

Climate Change BS Glacier National Park Quietly Removes Its "Gone By 2020" Signs

Glacier Park isn't the only place changing out their years of LIES ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE WITH NEW DATES.

This article was written by Roger I. Roots 

Officials at Glacier National Park (GNP) have begun quietly removing and altering signs and government literature which told visitors that the Park’s glaciers were all expected to disappear by either 2020 or 2030.

In recent years the National Park Service prominently featured brochures, signs and films which boldly proclaimed that all glaciers at GNP were melting away rapidly. But now officials at GNP seem to be scrambling to hide or replace their previous hysterical claims while avoiding any notice to the public that the claims were inaccurate. Teams from Lysander Spooner University visiting the Park each September have noted that GNP’s most famous glaciers such as the Grinnell Glacier and the Jackson Glacier appear to have been growing - not shrinking - since about 2010. (The Jackson Glacier—easily seen from the Going-To-The-Sun Highway—may have grown as much as 25% or more over the past decade.)

The centerpiece of the visitor center at St. Mary near the east boundary is a large three-dimensional diorama showing lights going out as the glaciers disappear. Visitors press a button to see the diorama lit up like a Christmas tree in 1850, then showing fewer and fewer lights until the diorama goes completely dark. As recently as September 2018 the diorama displayed a sign saying GNP’s glaciers were expected to disappear completely by 2020.


But at some point during this past winter (as the visitor center was closed to the public), workers replaced the diorama’s ‘gone by 2020’ engraving with a new sign indicating the glaciers will disappear in “future generations.”

Almost everywhere, the Park’s specific claims of impending glacier disappearance have been replaced with more nuanced messaging indicating that everyone agrees that the glaciers are melting. Some signs indicate that glacial melt is “accelerating.”

A common trick used by the National Park Service at GNP is to display old black-and-white photos of glaciers from bygone years (say, “1922”) next to photos of the same glaciers taken in more recent years showing the glaciers much diminished (say, “2006”). Anyone familiar with glaciers in the northern Rockies knows that glaciers tend to grow for nine months each winter and melt for three months each summer. Thus, such photo displays without precise calendar dates may be highly deceptive.
Last year the Park Service quietly removed its two large steel trash cans at the Many Glacier Hotel which depicted “before and after” engravings of the Grinnell Glacier in 1910 and 2009. The steel carvings indicated that the Glacier had shrunk significantly between the two dates. But a viral video published on Wattsupwiththat.com showed that the Grinnell Glacier appears to be slightly larger than in 2009.
The ‘gone by 2020’ claims were repeated in the New York Times, National Geographic, and other international news sources. But no mainstream news outlet has done any meaningful reporting regarding the apparent stabilization and recovery of the glaciers in GNP over the past decade. Even local Montana news sources such as The Missoulian, Billings Gazette and Bozeman Daily Chronicle have remained utterly silent regarding this story.
(Note that since September 2015 the author has offered to bet anyone $5,000 that GNP’s glaciers will still exist in 2030, in contradiction to the reported scientific consensus. To this day no one has taken me up on my offer. –R.R.)
*  *  *

I live very close to Glacier National Park, and while the media has been saying for years that the glaciers are "disappearing", there has been no significant change in the park's glaciers in the time I have resided here.  The news above only reinforces the reality that if the climate is "changing", it is only getting colder, NOT warmer....
- Brandon Smith, Founder of Alt-Market.com

ACTUAL SCIENTIST: "Climate Change is a Scam!"

Civilization At Risk, Crisis By 2040, And Other Nonsensical Climate BS

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,
The amount of climate scaremongering in the past few weeks is stunning. And it's all pure bullshit.

Excelsior!

Check out these headlines.

Wall Street Journal: U.N. Panel Warns Drastic Action Needed to Stave Off Climate Change
New York Times: Major Climate Report Describes a Strong Risk of Crisis as Early as 2040
The Intercept: FOSSIL FUELS ARE A THREAT TO CIVILIZATION, NEW U.N. REPORT CONCLUDES
Earther: We Have a Decade to Prevent a Total Climate Disaster
MarketWatch: Drastic action needed to prevent climate catastrophe, U.N. panel warns
Daily Caller: AL GORE: ‘WE’RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME’ ON GLOBAL WARMING

Q&A

Q.What do all of those headline have in common?
A. They are all based on the same study. The study is riddled with huge numbers of blatant errors making the study for lack of better words, pure bullshit.

Riddled With Errors

Watts Up With That reports BOMBSHELL: audit of global warming data finds it riddled with errors

• Almost no quality control checks have been done: outliers that are obvious mistakes have not been corrected – one town in Columbia spent three months in 1978 at an average daily temperature of over 80 degrees C. One town in Romania stepped out from summer in 1953 straight into a month of Spring at minus 46°C. These are supposedly “average” temperatures for a full month at a time. St Kitts, a Caribbean island, was recorded at 0°C for a whole month, and twice!
  
• Sea surface temperatures represent 70% of the Earth’s surface, but some measurements come from ships which are logged at locations 100km inland. Others are in harbors which are hardly representative of the open ocean.
  
• The dataset starts in 1850 but for just over two years at the start of the record the only land-based data for the entire Southern Hemisphere came from a single observation station in Indonesia. At the end of five years just three stations reported data in that hemisphere. Global averages are calculated from the averages for each of the two hemispheres, so these few stations have a large influence on what’s supposedly “global”.
  
• According to the method of calculating coverage for the dataset, 50% global coverage wasn’t reached until 1906 and 50% of the Southern Hemisphere wasn’t reached until about 1950.
  
• In May 1861 global coverage was a mere 12% – that’s less than one-eighth. In much of the 1860s and 1870s most of the supposedly global coverage was from Europe and its trade sea routes and ports, covering only about 13% of the Earth’s surface. To calculate averages from this data and refer to them as “global averages” is stretching credulity.
  
• When a thermometer is relocated to a new site, the adjustment assumes that the old site was always built up and “heated” by concrete and buildings. In reality, the artificial warming probably crept in slowly. By correcting for buildings that likely didn’t exist in 1880, old records are artificially cooled. Adjustments for a few site changes can create a whole century of artificial warming trends.
  
• Data prior to 1950 suffers from poor coverage and very likely multiple incorrect adjustments of station data. Data since that year has better coverage but still has the problem of data adjustments and a host of other issues mentioned in the audit.
  
• Another implication is that the proposal that the Paris Climate Agreement adopt 1850-1899 averages as “indicative” of pre-industrial temperatures is fatally flawed. During that period global coverage is low – it averages 30% across that time – and many land-based temperatures are very likely to be excessively adjusted and therefore incorrect.
  

Complex Systems Reduced to Single Variable

Also consider Watts Up With That Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup 331.
A participant in the IPCC, who resigned, atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT. He is noted for his work in dynamic meteorology, atmospheric tides, ozone photochemistry, quasi-biennial oscillation, and the Iris hypothesis. Lindzen is certainly qualified to talk about the physics of the atmosphere, where the greenhouse effect occurs. Several key points of the talk are summarized below.

• “Nature has numerous examples of autonomous variability, including the approximately 11-year sunspot cycle and the reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field every couple of hundred thousand years or so. In this respect, the climate system is no different from other natural systems.
  
• “Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance.
  
• “This is an extraordinary pair of claims based on reasoning that borders on magical thinking. It is, however, the narrative that has been widely accepted, even among many sceptics.
  
• “Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable. And although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small — compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere — they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control CO2 levels.”
  
• Sea level has been increasing by about 8 inches per century for hundreds of years, and we have clearly been able to deal with it. In order to promote fear, however, those models that predict much larger increases are invoked. As a practical matter, it has long been known that at most coastal locations, changes in sea level, as measured by tide gauges, are primarily due to changes in land level associated with both tectonics and land use.
  
• The small change in global mean temperature (actually the change in temperature increase) is much smaller than what the computer models used by the IPCC have predicted. Even if all this change were due to man, it would be most consistent with low sensitivity to added carbon dioxide, and the IPCC only claims that most (not all) of the warming over the past 60 years is due to man’s activities. Thus, the issue of man-made climate change does not appear to be a serious problem. However, this hardly stops ignorant politicians from declaring that the IPCC’s claim of attribution is tantamount to unambiguous proof of coming disaster
  
• Cherry picking is always an issue. Thus, there has been a recent claim that Greenland ice discharge has increased, and that warming will make it worse. Omitted from the report is the finding by both NOAA and the Danish Meteorological Institute that the ice mass of Greenland has actually been increasing. In fact both these observations can be true, and, indeed, ice build-up pushes peripheral ice into the sea.
  
• Misrepresentation, exaggeration, cherry picking, or outright lying pretty much covers all the so-called evidence.
• As a scientist for 35 years who has researched ocean and atmospheric evolution over the past 4 billion years, I am prepared to state that the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory, whereby the earth is being warmed by carbon dioxide, is the greatest scientific fraud of the 20th century. There is no science to support this theory and the IPCC is about politics, not science. In the process, science has been corrupted. 
  we were all taught in high school chemistry that  results cannot exceed the accuracy of the data inputs.
  if your measuring cup was graduated (labeled) to 5 ml increments, then taking the average of 3 or more readings using this container cannot be scientifically expressed with more accuracy than the 5ml increments, ie. you cannot have an average of 36ml and certainly not 36.7 ml
  But we are supposed to believe climate change is real going back to 1850 because "science" says we can "prove" 0.7  or 1.7 degrees (or some other number with a decimal) of temperature change worldwide?
  Total hogwash, the instruments were not 0.1 accurate. were likely not all properly calibrated together, and many other REQUIREMENTS for measurements to be properly taken according to scientific rules. These climate "scientists",simply had to throw out all the rules for data gathering and reporting to arrive and these 0.x numbers. fact.
  NEXT more CO2 makes plants grow better, ask the indoor cannabis growers. in turn this results in higher oxygen level, benefiting animal life. This is believed to be the reason past life forms could become so much larger than today, higher oxygen concentrations allowed larger life forms, especially true with insect, but proven true in studies of fish, where they grew super sized piranhas.
  
  

Lindzen's entire speech is much needed and worth reading. Simply because the IPCC names its process as science, does not make it science.

Australia Weather Bureau Caught Tampering with Climate Numbers to Create an Artificial Warming Trend

 

The lies are everywhere, with the satanic network

Australian scientists at the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) ordered a review of temperature recording instruments after the government agency was caught tampering with temperature logs in several locations.
Agency officials admit that the problem with instruments recording low temperatures likely happened in several locations throughout Australia, but they refuse to admit to manipulating temperature readings. The BOM located missing logs in Goulburn and the Snow Mountains, both of which are in New South Wales.
Meteorologist Lance Pidgeon watched the 13 degrees Fahrenheit Goulburn recording from July 2 disappear from the bureau’s website. The temperature readings fluctuated briefly and then disappeared from the government’s website.

“The temperature dropped to minus 10 (13 degrees Fahrenheit), stayed there for some time and then it changed to minus 10.4 (14 degrees Fahrenheit) and then it disappeared,” Pidgeon said, adding that he notified scientist Jennifer Marohasy about the problem, who then brought the readings to the attention of the bureau.

The bureau would later restore the original 13 degrees Fahrenheit reading after a brief question and answer session with Marohasy.

“The bureau’s quality ­control system, designed to filter out spurious low or high values was set at minus 10 minimum for Goulburn which is why the record automatically adjusted,” a bureau spokeswoman told reporters Monday. BOM added that there are limits placed on how low temperatures could go in some very cold areas of the country.

Bureaus Chief Executive Andrew Johnson told Australian Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg that the failure to record the low temperatures at Goulburn in early July was due to faulty equipment. A similar failure wiped out a reading of 13 degrees Fahrenheit at Thredbo Top on July 16, even though temperatures at that station have been recorded as low as 5.54 degrees Fahrenheit.
Failure to observe the low temperatures had “been interpreted by a member of the community in such a way as to imply the bureau sought to manipulate the data record,” Johnson said, according to The Australian. “I categorically reject this ­implication.”

Marohasy, for her part, told reporters that Johnson’s claims are nearly impossible to believe given that there are screen shots that show the very low temperatures before being “quality assured” out. It could take several weeks before the equipment is eventually tested, reviewed and ready for service, Johnson said.

“I have taken steps to ensure that the hardware at this location is replaced immediately,” he added.
“To ensure that I have full ­assurance on these matters, I have actioned an internal review of our AWS network and associated data quality control processes for temperature observations.”

BOM has been put under the microscope before for similar manipulations. The agency was accused in 2014 of tampering with the country’s temperature record to make it appear as if temperatures had warmed over the decades, according to reports in August 2014.
Marohasey claimed at the time that BOM’s adjusted temperature records are “propaganda” and not science. She analyzed raw temperature data from places across Australia, compared them to BOM data, and found the agency’s data created an artificial warming trend.
Marohasey said BOM adjustments changed Aussie temperature records from a slight cooling trend to one of “dramatic warming” over the past century.

 http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-08-01/australia-weather-bureau-caught-tampering-with-climate-numbers-to-create-an-artificial-warming-trend/

Climate Change HOAX exposed by Geologist straight to the UK Govt