NASA Satellite Temperatures Approaching A Record Low

We must stop global warming now… oh, we already have?

Steve Goddard writes at Real Science:

Factoring in the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions at El Chichón and Mt. Pinatubo in the 1980s and 1990s, January 2012 will come close to being the coldest month in the last 30 years. This despite a weakening La Nina and a solar maximum in progress.

Read Goddard’s report.

16 thoughts on “NASA Satellite Temperatures Approaching A Record Low”

  1. Scientific American is a popular magazine, not a serious scientific journal. Other than the pretty pictures, it is an unreliable source of technical information. You should be careful of using information found in Scientific American, unless you are well-founded in the underlying science. About a decade ago their content began to take on a clear political tone, so I terminated my subscription.

  2. Must not be checking temps in the Northeast. Except for a couple of short (2day) spells our temps have been well above normal, and lots higher than last year, which resulted in the local river freezing over completely for the first time in several years.
    Last summer, however, was one of the warmest, with a one day high off my back porch of 102° F

  3. Our January in our southern summer has been cool with snowstorms etc on low altitude areas. Our TBs (true believers) attribute this to AGW causing much more variability in daily weather.

    You can’t win- it is AGW if it gets warmer, and AGW if it gets cooler. Certainly my tomatoes are taking far longer than normal to ripen and you can’t fool plants.

  4. Well Micheal Shermer is the only reason I hang on to the sciam subscription. I am a fan. But yes sciam has gone very P.C. Of course Micheal Shermer has jumped on board with the warming thing but I suspect his career would go into the toilet if he didn’t . How many lectures would he be able to give in California colleges if he railed against man made global warming. I highly believe he still a MMGW skeptic. (off topic I know 🙂

  5. Scientific American was a great magazine during the 1960’s and 1970’s, then it rapidly began to fade. It is now a collection of colored pictures with no real content. I dropped my subscription over 20 years ago.

  6. Heard the local weather tonite, locally, temps have been above average 16 of the first 25 days of Jan., at an average of +3.5°.
    Doesn’t sounds like colder weather to me. ( No I don’t believe in the global warming alarmism.)

  7. Ah yes, global lying, coming to a gagged scientific organisation near you, and sponsored by the ones who would tax the whole of the western world for their own benefit, so they don’t have to dig into their own pockets to start another world domination scheme. Perhaps USA debt recovery depends on others supporting this UN scheme. Time to oust the “banker” families and their kin. Crikey I sound like a communist!

  8. If you lived in Alaska, you’d know how cold it’s been. They’re setting records for cold temperatures and the only reason you’ve gotten a reprieve is because that cold air has been blocked from moving south into the lower 48 until just recently. Also, poor Nome was having difficulty getting fuel because of excessively thick ice impeding a tanker.

  9. I was a subscriber to the Scientific American from 1955, having been an avid reader for years before. But it deteriorated. For example, instead of having scientists write articles about their work, they started having “science writers” write the articles. So I dropped my subscription of many years.

  10. I have a much more reliable way of determining the harshness of the forthcoming winter: Whenever I buy a winter device, i.e. snow thrower, AWD vehicle, etc. it will not snow that winter. Bought a Q5 this January- your welcome…..

  11. In my teen age years I read every issue of Scientific American. I learned many things. Some of the math articles were particularly interesting.

    As I studied more deeply into computers at Georgia Tech in those early days, I learned how superficial and sometimes wrong this magazine was. I wondered if the other things I was learning were wrong in the same ways. I soon stopped diverting my limited time and $ to this process.

    I still buy an occasional issue, if only to see how the “other side” thinks about global warming or the dangers of DDT.

    I was not interested in “Global Warming” in my teens. The USAF sent me to MIT for a year to study meteorology where I first learned of the cycles of warming and cooling which have recurred since our climate was established. Later, in my work, I observed our efforts to control weather, and participated in the development of models to forecast the variations. In recent years I have read dozens of books and hundreds of articles on the issue of “Anthropogenic Global Warming” and of the causes of global temperature changes.

    Many, if not most, of the articles in Scientific American appear to give unrealistic views of the issues relating to the possibility of the effect of humankind on these cycles. Remember, if “consensus” ruled science, the earth would still be flat and the center of the universe.

    Scientific American articles make fun reading at times. They should not be cited for scientific facts unless you can find another reliable source which agrees.

    Bill Lyons, GT ’56, MIT ’58

  12. Heh, wanna know something funny? Most people already knew the Earth wasn’t flat. That part is a myth.

Comments are closed.