‘Temperature records from nature reaffirm climate warming’ — or not

They’ve actually debunked themselves.

“A team of scientists has reaffirmed that Earth’s climate has been warming for the past century, using an analysis of temperature records other than those from instruments. These scientists – including researchers from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), University of South Carolina, University of Colorado, and University of Bern in Switzerland – gathered temperature records from nature to show warming on Earth from at least 1880 to 1995.” [EarthSky.org]

But what about from 1995-present, during which time we’ve added about 35+ ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere?

About these ads

5 responses to “‘Temperature records from nature reaffirm climate warming’ — or not

  1. A perfect example of tautology as research, filled with assumptions, averages, and asseverations. Because, you know, direct measurements aren’t reliable.

  2. A classic example of the old strategem: “If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t.”
    Make a claim, dump a truckload of technical-sounding jargon on them, and repeat the claim as if the jargon ‘proves’ the claim.
    The idea is that by the time they have parsed your presentation enough to debunk it entirely, you have already collected your money and ridden off to the next town with your wagon full of elixers.

  3. Very interesting! By the time you get to actual paper in GRL you find that not only is it not available for free, it is not available even for purchase. This is a document that we paid for and we are prevented from reading it. NOAA has no shame. And just a week ago NOAA published data showing that sea level was somewhere between 1.1 and 1.3mm per year. The reason it was that high was because they added .9mm to the station data. I guess they don’t like direct measurements.

  4. University of South Carolina was involved to read the chicken entrails.

    Does the Weather Channel use instruments, or temperature records from nature? Why use instruments?

  5. They could have used a divining rod to come to their conclusion, since actual temperature data appears to still be rather flat in the grand scheme of things. This I NOAA after all and since the vast majority of the employees there are drinkers of the Cool-aid, would we expect any other result from their study?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s