C3

Bizarre "Science" By Lubchenco's NOAA: Fake Global Warming, Part IV

Previous Lubchenco's NOAA "Science" Posts here, here and here.

Last time we checked, 'Lubchenco Science' had accomplished 3 full revisions of the entire historical temperature dataset during January, adding to the 6 known full revisions done in December.

Surprise!....Lubchenco has managed to squeeze another full revision of the entire temperature dataset in the last few days - making it at least 4 for January.

NOAA is now up to 10 full revisions since October - they refer to their constant revising of the historical data going back to 1880 as "quality control." In contrast, NASA/GISS, HadCRUT, UAH and RSS have not revised their entire datasets once during the last two months.

Soooo....Lubchenco '10', Rest of World '0'.

Download the latest spreadsheet of bizarre "quality control" revisions.

Previous fabricating-fake temperature posts and charts.

The Non-Existent Sea Level Crisis: A Video of Empirical Evidence Destined To Drive AGW Alarmists Crazy

The faux sea level rise crisis perpetrated by the pathological AGW fear-mongering community is exposed - predicted sea level increases without data merit

The IPCC and its Climategate associates have literally fabricated scary global warming scenarios of immense sea level increases that will swamp coastal regions with - namely, 20mm/year increases at a minimum.

Of course, as with any prediction by the IPCC-related gang, the sea level protection racket does not comport with the empirical evidence, as this Climate Sanity blog video reveals. The video exposes the real sea level data, which alarmists are utterly unable to refute. Enjoy.

Sea level increases past 20,000 years.

Additional sea-level postings and charts.

The Massive NASA & IPCC Embarrassment: Hansen's Abysmal Global Warming Model Predictions

James Hansen has provided proof over the last few decades that climate models are worthless as climate prediction tools - will NASA & the IPCC admit failure?

(click on images to enlarge)

Using the December-end temperature anomalies (chart on left), it is readily apparent that NASA's James Hansen is entirely incapable of producing accurate global temperature predictions over the long-term. His predictions have been so bad that even the mainstream press is finally coming around to the realization that the alarmist global warming scenarios are truly without merit.

The second chart (on the right) exhibits the non-predicted deceleration of global temperatures over the last 15 years using the IPCC's gold-standard HadCRUT dataset.

Whether it is long or short-term, Hansen/NASA models are no better than a Ouija board as a tool to predict global temperatures. This massive failure by Hansen et al can also be seen in his model's prediction of ocean heat content and sea level rise.

Previous failed-prediction postings. Additional modern, regional and historical temperature charts.

Last 100 Years of CO2 & Temperatures: The IPCC's HadCRUT Data Confirms CO2's Small Impact On Global Warming

The IPCC's "Climate Bible" relies on the HadCRUT (HC) global temperature dataset for its analysis - the last 100 years of HC data reveals the weak CO2 and global warming relationship

A previous 'C3' post regarding CO2 and NOAA / NCDC global temperatures generated a lot of interest, especially the second chart titled: "The Case Against CO2." That chart revealed that CO2's impact on global temperatures was essentially very weak over the last 50 years, ending 2011, versus the prior 50 years ending 1961.

We received questions as to how the famous HadCRUT (the IPCC's favorite global temperature dataset) compared to the previously used NOAA/NCDC dataset. The adjacent chart shows the result of switching to the all important HC data.

As one can discern from this chart, the result is essentially the same for the two datasets (see previous NOAA/NCDC chart).

Conclusions:

• The 50-year period ending 1961 had little CO2 growth, yet global temperatures increased significantly more than the "unprecedented" and "accelerating" global warming of the 50-year period ending 2011.
• The growth of CO2 levels has an inconsistent effect on global temperatures suggesting the CO2 and temperature relationship is not robust - it is actually frail
• Global temperatures are not "accelerating" because of CO2 during the last 50 years
• Modern global warming over last 50 years was not "unprecedented" versus earlier periods
• Other climate dynamics and inputs primarily drive temperature and climate change - the trace gas CO2 has only a trace impact in comparison

Previous accelerated-warming postings. Additional modern, regional and historical temperature charts.

Data sources for Excel chart: here, here and here.

NOAA's Climate Science Data Firmly Establishes That CO2 Is Not Earth's Temperature "Thermostat"

Many global warming alarmist scientists make the claim that CO2 is the world's thermostat - NOAA climate evidence totally debunks that bogus claim

The urban myth of the all powerful climate trace gas CO2 has led both alarmist climate scientists and EPA bureaucrats with political agendas to actually claim that CO2 is like a furnace's thermostat. Just dial the increase/decrease of CO2 change desired, and like a furnace, the earth's temperature will respond up/down accordingly.

That claim is robust, bogus political propaganda with zero scientific merit, as NOAA's empirical science collection efforts have well established. (click chart to enlarge)

This chart plots actual annual changes in atmospheric levels (from 1880 through 2011) versus actual annual changes in NOAA/NCDC global temperatures for the same time period. As can be seen, the annual change in CO2 (the black columns) have little if any impact of annual temp change (the red-orange curve). The R^2 measurement of the CO2 and temperature relationship is a meager +0.016 - that would be a R^2 of teeny-weeny proportions (essentially there is no cause and effect relationship).

The longer term view supports that finding also. The green curve on the chart is the 20-year average of CO2 level changes; the blue curve is the 20-year average of global temperature changes. Clearly, changes in CO2 are not driving changes in temperatures - CO2 is not a "thermostat".

Conclusions:

• Global annual temperature changes are not a result of changes in CO2 levels
• CO2 is not some magical global thermostat
• Other climate dynamics drive major temperature change and climate change
• The above conclusions do not preclude CO2 having a consistently minor, beneficial warming influence on global temperatures

Additional modern, regional and historical temperature charts.

Data sources for Excel chart and R^2 calculation: global temperature and 1959-2011 CO2 and pre-1959 CO2

Can Climate Models Predict Snowfall? EU Researchers Ascertain Models Are Worthless For Snowfall

Often climate models are utilized for specific regional climate forecasts - scientists determine that for regional snowfalls, the models are worthless

Read here. It is well established that climate models have been atrocious at predicting global warming and other climate attributes. This lack of predictive skill globally is compounded when these models attempt to make regional predictions such as snowfall in a specific region.

EU scientists, Soncini and Bocchiola, analyzed snowfall predictions by two major climate models for the Italian Alps region. The models did not perform as advertised.

"The authors write that "General Circulation Models (GCMs) are widely adopted tools to achieve future climate projections." They note, however, that "one needs to assess their accuracy, which is only possible by comparison of GCMs' control runs against past observed data,"...investigated the accuracy of simulations of snowfall throughout the Italian Alps that were provided by two GCMs...included within the family of models employed by the IPCC. This was done by comparing the models' output with a set of comprehensive ground data obtained from some 400 snow-gauging stations located within the region of interest for the period 1990-2009...determined that "the investigated GCMs provide poor depiction of the snowfall timing and amount upon the Italian Alps," noting, in fact, that the HadCM3 model actually "displays considerable snowfall during summer," which they indicate "is clearly not supported by ground data"..."given the poor depiction of snowfall by the GCMs here tested, we suggest that care should be taken when using their outputs for predictive purposes."" [A. Soncini, D. Bocchiola 2011: Cold Regions Science and Technology]

Additional failed-predictions, severe-weather and peer-reviewed postings.

Ocean Heat Content: Climate Models Continue To Fail Miserably At Predicting OHC

The NASA climate model developed by James Hansen has been atrocious at predicting global warming over the last 15 years and the evidence mounts it is even worse at predicting ocean heat content

Read here. The oceans represent some 70% of the globe's surface and is a giant reservoir of energy, with an immense effect on the climate. Being able to accurately predict the heat content is absolutely essential if climate models are ever to be trusted.

As the adjacent chart by expert Bob Tisdale reveals, the NASA climate model prediction for ocean heat content (OHC) is robustly higher than actual measurements of OHC since 2003. The model doesn't work as advertised, like most climate models' predictions.

"The reality is, the flattening of the Global OHC anomaly data was not anticipated by those who created the models. This of course raises many questions, one of which is, if the models did not predict the flattening of the OHC data in recent years, much of which is based on the drop in North Atlantic OHC, did the models hindcast the rise properly from 1955 to 2003? Apparently not."

The NASA model was developed by Hansen. He had it programmed to predict a rapid increase in OHC based on the questionable CO2-based AGW hypothesis. Because of a major weakness in the AGW hypothesis (the never realized positive feedback loops) NASA's model is unable to predict OHC correctly, let alone the world's climate.

Additional climate-model postings.

Scientists Discover That Frequency of Super Hurricanes Has Declined Significantly Over Last 600 Years

Super hurricane frequency was greater thousands of years ago when CO2 levels were low - new evidence shows modern global warming has not caused an increase

Read here. Image source here.

The IPCC and other global warming alarmists predicted that the frequency of extreme hurricanes would increase because of CO2-induced global warming. At least that's what their theory told them.

Recently, climate researchers analyzed a large Florida sinkhole that had hurricane evidence going back some 4,500 years. This new empirical evidence now establishes that super hurricane frequency was much greater thousands of years ago, and that the modern era has experienced far fewer of these monster storms despite human CO2 and warming.

"Lane et al. developed a 4500-year record of intense hurricane-induced storm surges based on data obtained from "a nearly circular, 200-m-diameter cover-collapse sinkhole...reconstructed record of intense hurricanes revealed that the frequency of these "high-magnitude" events "peaked near 6 storms per century between 2800 and 2300 years ago." Thereafter, it suggests that they were "relatively rare" with "about 0-3 storms per century occurring between 1900 and 1600 years ago," after which they state that these super-storms exhibited a marked decline, which "began around 600 years ago" and has persisted through the present with "below average frequency over the last 150 years when compared to the preceding five millennia."" [Philip Lane, Jeffrey P. Donnelly, Jonathan D. Woodruff, Andrea D. Hawkes 2011: Marine Geology]

Previous severe-weather and peer-reviewed postings. Severe-weather charts.

NASA's Research Substantiates Trend Towards Global Cooling - Human "Global Warming" From CO2 Has Disappeared

Latest data from NASA / GISS confirms the robust deceleration of global warming, revealing the non-significant impact on global temperatures by CO2 

(click on images to enlarge)

The AGW alarmist claim of "accelerating" global warming requires, at minimum, an increasing rate of temperature change as denoted by an increasing slope of a linear trend line. The two above charts plot the rolling 10-year trend (slope) of the annual GISS temperature data - the left axis of both charts represents slope in terms of temperature change per hundred years (century).

The leftmost chart reveals a large variation in speed and level of temperature change since the 1800s. The right chart takes the same data but only plots the last 15 years of GISS "acceleration" and "deceleration."

From the 2001 peak of a +3.48°C/century temperature rate, it has now fallen at the end of 2011 to an almost flat rate of +0.04°C/century temperature increase. Per the actual evidence, the increasing atmospheric levels of CO2 (grey arrow and grey area of charts) has zero influence on whether global temperatures are accelerating or decelerating.

These two charts do not represent predictions of future temperatures, but both clearly indicate that the IPCC and major climate research agencies have been substantially wrong in predicting "accelerating" warming.

Likewise, they have been substantially wrong in their assumption that the climate sensitivity to increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 is positive, growing and nearing a runaway tipping point. The empirical evidence proves all of these assertions to be essentially false.

Conclusions:

• Global temperatures are decelerating, not accelerating
• Rising CO2 levels do not cause global temperatures to continuously increase
• Climate sensitivity to CO2 levels is not robust
• IPCC predictions of "runaway" temps and climate "tipping points" are without empirical merit

Additional global and regional temperature charts. Previous failed-prediction postings.

Download data file used in above Excel charts

Subarctic Seas: Latest Study Confirms Modern Temperatures Well Below Roman & Medieval Temps

Experts reconstruct sea surface temperatures off of Norway - evidence confirms this subarctic region was warmer during Roman and Medieval times

Read here. It's another peer reviewed study published that refutes Mann's 'hockey stick' caricature of past temperatures over the last 2000 years. (click image to enlarge)

Modern warming is not unprecedented as claimed by the IPCC's Climategate "scientists."

"Sejrup et al established exceptionally accurate chronologies for two marine sediment cores raised from the same location on the Norwegian continental margin...they developed the δ¹⁸O history depicted in the figure [adjacent], which they use as a proxy for what they call "near surface water summer temperature." And as this history clearly shows, the peak warmth of the Medieval Warm Period was significantly greater than the peak warmth of the Current Warm Period has been to date." [H.P. Sejrup, H. Haflidason, J.T. Andrews 2011: Quaternary Science Reviews]

Additional climate-history and peer-reviewed postings. Historical and modern temperature charts.

"Science" By Lubchenco's NOAA: Fake Global Warming, Part III

The NOAA under Lubchenco's control continues to make a mockery of empirical-based science as global warming fabrication continues unchecked

This is an update from the two previous posts, here and here. During the month of December, NOAA / NCDC revised their published historical temperature dataset at least 6 times - affecting monthly historical temperatures going back to 1880. These major revisions were not constrained to just a few recent months or a few recent years, but to all the historical empirical records.

If doing it 6 times in December wasn't bizarre enough, the NOAA "scientists" have already revised the entire dataset 3 times during January (the month isn't even over yet). [Ed. Good news: No new revised datasets in last 2 days, which means the incessant changes may be halted until next month]

Since the Obama administration takeover of NOAA / NCDC, it has been on a tear to fabricate global warming, conducting major temperature fabrication on an almost monthly basis, which has now culminated to producing multiple major revisions per month. (click to enlarge images)

(Above is a sample of revisions, including 2 (of 3) done in January 2012.)

Defenders of Lubchenco's empirical evidence revisionism refer to the constant revisions as "quality control" which is categorically one of the lamest piles of B.S. uttered in the debate on global warming. If the 'QC' defense had even an ounce of truth to it, it would mean every single previous revision had "quality control" issues even though each was a result of the same quality control process.

Plus, in contrast to the 7 major revisions done by NOAA / NCDC over the last 4 weeks, there has been only one major revision by GISS and zero for HadCRUT, UAH and RSS. (These other alphabet climate agencies do not do major revisions every single month, let alone multiple major revisions to the historical record within a month.)

Simply put, the 'big green' activist Lubchenco must have a political agenda that calls for the NCDC dataset exhibiting more "global warming."

Needless to say, her servile puppet-scientists have performed that task since 2008, month-in and month-out, as the change in the global warming trend  exhibits (red is new trend; blue is old) in the adjacent chart.

[Bonus recommendation to NOAA/ NCDC: Publish only one set of numbers per month; avoid changing historical temperatures prior to 1990; and, make future changes random so that they don't appear to be purposefully warming specific periods while cooling others. Food for thought.]

BTW, this Excel chart represents the typical way that alarmists portray "runaway" global warming. That red trend line leaves the impression that global warming will go through the roof by 2100. In fact though, that red trend line indicates a "global warming" of about +0.5°C by year 2100. To mislead the public and policymakers, alarmist scientists and the mainstream press typically avoid putting numeric linear trend information on the chart, for very obvious reasons.

Additional modern, fabricated-fake and historical temperature charts.

Download data file of NOAA's January 2012 revisions (3 so far) of historical temperature dataset.

X-File Climate Science In Dublin: When The Government Needs "Global Warming" It Just Happens

Climate research agencies are hellbent on proving their global warming case, even to the point of fabricating higher temperatures

Read here. Steve Goddard identifies another amazing instance of NASA X-Files climate science: robust man-made global warming from a PC.

Per this chart, Dublin was significantly cooler until NASA "scientists" literally changed the empirical evidence.

As they say: Trust no one - especially government employed/funded climate scientists.

Global Cooling Is Here, Part XV: Increased CO2 Levels Must Cause Global Cooling, No?

We have not updated this series since November 2010 but the multitude of cold, stormy weather reports suggests a trend that corroborates these previous postings: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11,  Part 12,  Part 13 and Part14.

Per the data, the negative characteristics of global cooling non-warming are making themselves felt across the world

The Sahara is covered by snow - first time ever?

So cold in Seattle an Arctic seal comes to visit

Canada slammed by record cold

Turkey paralyzed by heavy snows

Seattle buried by one-day snow storm

Missoula International Airport, MT receives record breaking snow

Winter ski mountain resort in Oregon closed due to heavy snows - 55 inches

India has 132 year old cold temperature broken

Kamloops, Canada has record snowfall

Cascade Mountains receiving crippling mount of snow

Southern India record cold snap kill 15

Northern Japan digs out after record snowfall

Idaho regions to get up to 4 feet of snow

Alaska dog sled races canceled - too much snow

Muskegon County Airport, MI shatters snowfall record

Nome, Alaska suffers with 30 degree below normal temperatures

Wisconsin winter storm dumps 24 inches of snow

Australia sets new records for low temperatures

Alaska's shortage of icebreakers is causing major problems this winter

Australia’s capital dropped to the lowest January temperature in recorded history

Alps snowstorm traps 17,000 with ten feet of now

Austria's ski areas receive record snow this winter

Midland, Texas sets three snowfall records in single day

India area has first snowfall in decades - bitter cold leaves 140 dead

An Alaska town gets 18 feet of now, roofs collapsing, people trapped in their homes

Russian supply ship stuck in thick ice - can't deliver supplies to Nome

Northern India struck with record snowfalls

Valdez, Alaska has snowiest December ever

Kenya's black tea crop has major loss from severe frost - worst ever

Every Florida county has freezing temperatures

New Orleans hit with freezing temperatures

New Mexico's cattle stranded by huge snows

Reykjavík, Iceland broke two December snow records

Switzerland blanketed with record snows

Russia's bitter cold threatens whales trapped by ice

San Luis Obispo County, California experiences coldest December in 40 years

Texas town to have first white Christmas in 72 years

Australia has coldest summer in 50 years

Great Plains hit by deadly winter storm

Parts of France pummeled by winter storm with 80 mph winds

Scotland battered by winter storm with 165 mph winds

New NOAA Data Debunks Establishment Science & MSM Claim of Dangerous "Accelerating" Warming

Science elites and their mainstream press comrades have been pushing the fantasy of rapid, accelerating global warming - NOAA proves they were lying

The claim that human CO2 causes rapid, accelerating global warming is empirically a very bogus statement.

As evident by the adjacent NOAA / NCDC data, the "accelerating" warming claim is without merit - it is a literally a myth that MSM reporters and establishment science elites use to serve their political agenda purposes.

As the orange circles indicate, annual temperature change constantly fluctuates between positive and negative values, and the blue 10-year average reveals zero "accelerated" warming. The growth of CO2 levels (grey columns and curve) reveals little influence on temperature change.

To put this in real world context, think about it this way:

1. If a portfolio manager said the orange circles represent accelerating investment returns, year after year, that person would likely be incarcerated or institutionalized for blatant fraud.

2. If the Google CEO told his board of the directors that the orange circles represent accelerating growth of Google profits, year after year, the board (even board member Al Gore) would have no choice but to fire the CEO for either gross stupidity or robust lying.

Is it any wonder that the American public trust in the mainstream press and the climate science establishment continues to plunge?

Previous accelerating-temperature postings. Additional modern and historical temperature charts.

Data sources for Excel chart: NCDC annual anomalies and annual CO2 levels.

NOAA's 2011 Global Temperature Dataset Released & Confirms That IPCC's "Global Warming" Is DOA

NOAA's National Climatic Data Center just released today their global temperature dataset for the year ending 2011 (and yes, they conducted another bizarre revision of the entire historical dataset - more on that in a later posting). (click on images to enlarge)

The chart on the left plots the NCDC global temperatures for the last 15 years ending 2011, plus the atmospheric CO2 levels. As the empirical evidence undeniably shows, there is no correlation between global temps and CO2, and the blue curve actually suggests a movement towards a cooling era.

The linear trend for the NCDC temperatures represents an increase by year 2100 of only +0.40°C degree - definitely not "accelerating" warming using anyone's definition. (see new post on "accelerating" here)

The measly "global warming" of the last 15 years is one story and another interesting story about global warming is found in looking at the last 100 years. When the 100 year span is broken into 50-year segments, one ending 2011 and the other ending 1961, the myth of dangerous global warming from human CO2 emissions really starts to unravel. (see update with HadCRUT temperature data)

The first red bar on second chart (chart on right) represents the increase of the 2011 mean temperature over that of 1961; the second red bar represents the increase of the 1961 mean temperature over that of 1911. Clearly, the increase of the mean temperature during the first 50-year period surpasses that of the last 50-year period ending 2011.

And the greater increase in mean temperature during the first 50 year period took place with a smaller increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, as depicted by the grey bars. In fact, the CO2 level increase over the last 50 years was greater than 4 times the earlier 50-year period.

The take home from both charts is rather simple and obvious: the urban myths of accelerating, unequivocal, irreversible, unprecedented, rapid, dangerous modern warming from human CO2 are just that - myths. In addition, these two charts reveal that any proposal suggesting that by controlling CO2 emissions it would be like controlling a global temperature "thermostat" is a bogosity bordering on insanity.

Summary: Both global warming and cooling have happened in the recent past, and both will occur again over the next 100 years, regardless of CO2 emissions.

Additional modern and historical temperature charts.

Data sources for Excel charts: NCDC monthly anomalies, annual anomalies, monthly CO2 levels and annual CO2 levels.

EU Research Indicates A Tiny 2.7 Inch Sea Level Rise By 2100 & NOAA Has Ocean Temps Declining

Latest EU satellite measurements puts sea rise at meager 2.7 inch rate by 2100 and NOAA can't find global warming in the oceans

Empirical evidence is a real bitch for 'big green' and the IPCC Climategate scientists, and, of course, James Hansen.

Per the trends, sea levels will be 2.7 inches higher in 2100 with ocean temperatures being lower by -0.5°C. (Note: trends are not predictions)

Since late 2003 the EU has had its own satellite to measure sea levels. With that new technology, they have determined that the sea's are barely rising (see blue curve in chart), in contrast to the prediction of "accelerating" sea level increases by the IPCC's minions, and the prediction of "boiling" ocean temperatures by others.

Boiling oceans!!!? Yup...James Hansen, a climate "expert," has recently been caught on video actually claiming that if ocean temperatures continue their trend they will begin to boil - see video here. This is the Madoff-style climate science that the elites eagerly swallow hook, line and sinker.

Previous sea-level and failed-prediction postings. Sea-level and modern temperature charts.

Data sources for Excel chart: Sea levels and ocean temps.

Climate Liar or Denier? Is The 'National Center for Science Education' Either or Neither?

Question: When a person or organization makes a clear "statement of fact" about global warming and climate change that is empirically wrong (wrong due to misrepresentation, deceit, omission, fabrication, speculation and/or exaggeration) does that constitute being a 'climate liar' or a 'climate denier' or both or neither?

Case in point: The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) states that "climate models have become remarkably accurate and...that future projections are robust."

The NCSE is spectacularly wrong with their above statement as the examples of robust prediction failure by climate models are empirical fact, which even the IPCC's associated scientists and model experts recognize.

So....is the NCSE a 'climate science liar'? A 'climate science denier'? A 'climate science abuser'? Or, just a flat-out, robust 'climate science ignoramus' (by accident or willingly)?

Also: Climate Skepticism the new Creationism? New NCSE board member excels in character smears and truth challenged to boot.

Stop The Hollywood-Bought Congressional Representatives & Senators From Censoring The Internet

Visit www.wikipedia.org today and capture their "blackout" page for posterity. Also, 'Tweet' your Senator and Representative from the 'blackout' page telling them you oppose SOPA and PIPA legislation.

Hollywood is attacking the basic Internet freedom we all enjoy through their paid-for puppets in Congress. Any Congressional critter who supports this type of legislation should be removed from office, no questions asked. Also, boycott any company or organization found on this list of SOPA/PIPA supporters.

Thousands of liberal, conservative and libertarian blogs/sites are joining forces to battle Hollywood's draconian anti-piracy legislative attempts that will result in the Internet being effectively censored. Here are four videos explaining why the SOPA/PIPA Hollywood legislation should be killed.

 

 

New Jet Propulsion Lab Analysis of Global Climate Model: Simulations of Arctic Ice Are 'Rather Poor'

More evidence that computer climate models are unable to produce accurate simulations of climate reality - the models can't do the Arctic

Read here. The Arctic polar region is dominated by ice and water. One would expect any taxpayer funded computer model worth its salt would be able to accurately predict the climate of this simple ice and water region, no? 

Well...as is the case with any computer climate model simulation, peer reviewed research finds the global climate models are also worthless for accurately predicting the Arctic climate, let alone the entire global climate.

"Specifically, he writes that (1) "Zhang and Walsh (2006) noted that even though the CMIP3 models capture the negative trend in sea ice area, the inter-model scatter is large," that (2) "Stroeve et al. (2007) show that few models exhibit negative trends that are comparable to observations," and that (3) "Eisenman et al. (2007) conclude that the results of current CMIP3 models cannot be relied upon for credible projections of sea ice behavior."...analysis demonstrates that "the skill of the CMIP3 models (as a group) in simulation of observed Arctic sea ice motion, Fram Strait export, extent, and thickness between 1979 and 2008 seems rather poor."..."...and that "the spatial pattern of Arctic sea ice thickness, a large-scale slowly varying climatic feature of the ice cover, is not reproduced in a majority of the models." Consequently, he writes that "the models will not get the main features of natural sea ice variability that may be dominating recent sea ice extent declines..." [R. Kwok 2011: Journal of Geophysical Research - Oceans]

Additional polar-glacier-sea-ice, failed-prediction and peer-reveiwed postings.

IPCC "Climate Science" Fail Is Major Embarrassment To Establishment Science: IPCC Can't Predict Squat

IPCC "experts" and climate models predicted that CO2 increases would cause runaway growth in atmospheric water vapor & temperatures - wrong on both counts

As the adjacent chart shows, atmospheric CO2 levels have been methodically rising. Per the IPCC's climate models and its Climategate experts, the rising CO2 should cause a water vapor "tipping point" that would cause "runaway" warming. It hasn't, on both counts.

The bold blue curve reveals atmospheric relative humidity actually decreasing (less water vapor) over the last 17 years since the end of 1994. The bold red curve represents the slowing growth of atmospheric warming, as measured by NASA's own satellite.

In essence, the fabled positive feedback the climate models use does not exist, and climate sensitivity to CO2 levels is robustly lower than assumed.

If the 17-year satellite linear trend were to continue unchanged, the global temperature increase by year 2100 would be only +1.13 degrees, well below the IPCC's minimum prediction. The last 10-year linear trend (not shown in chart) indicates an increase of a measly +0.3 degrees for global temps by 2100, which would be barely perceptible.

Simply stated, the IPCC can't predict squat, especially anything to do with climate changes due to human CO2. Establishment science and coastal elites are literally besides themselves as the empirical evidence continues to affirm that the "consensus" IPCC catastrophic AGW hypothesis is at best, lame, and more likely just plain invalid.

Additional modern and historical temperature charts.

Note: This analysis used a 17-year span, which Climategate's infamous Ben Santer prefers. Download data file used for Excel chart (CO2 data was superimposed on temperature and humidity chart).

Antarctica: IPCC Proven Conclusively Wrong By Newest Research - South Pole Cooling

The Antarctica climate evidence is irrefutable - the southern polar region is cooling, not warming as IPCC predicted

(click on images to enlarge)

Read here. The chart on the left is new empirical evidence released by the German climate research organization, the Alfred Wegener Institute. Their polar weather station temperature records clearly confirm the cooling trend as previously measured by satellite over the last 30 years (chart on the right).

In addition, a new peer reviewed study found that over the last 30 years the Antarctica snowmelt has been trending down, which substantiates the observed cooler temperatures as the above plots show.

"Surface snowmelt is widespread in coastal Antarctica. Satellite-based microwave sensors have been observing melt area and duration for over three decades.....The paper actually shows a declining trend in snowmelt over the past 31 years, although not statistically significant. Of note, the abstract states, "other than atmospheric processes likely determine long-term ice shelf stability." Translation: increased CO2 and other 'greenhouse gases' do not threaten stability of the Antarctic ice shelf." [P. Kuipers Munneke, G. Picard, M. R. van den Broeke, J. T. M. Lenaerts, E. van Meijgaard 2011: Geophysical Research Letters]

Previous polar-ice-sheet-glacier, failed-prediction and peer-reviewed postings. Modern and regional temperature charts.

"Warming" Iceland Robustly Using The Climate-Liars Scientific Methodology

An example of blatant data manipulation and temperature fabrication by climate scientists - "we need to make Iceland warmer"

Read here. Steve Goddard finds another classic example of temperature fabrication involving Iceland records. Misleading the public and policymakers has become a corrupt science art-form, unchallenged by the political ruling elites and their puppet, the mainstream press.

As this style of climate-liar "science" is applied to all past temperature records, large "man-made" global warming is a no-brainer.

Additional fabricating-fake temperature and modern temperature charts.

Peer Reviewed Study: Increased Solar Flux Drove Global Warming During 20th Century

New research published in 2011 & 2012 continues to build on a major 1999 study that found increased sun activity (solar flux, etc.) is a significant cause of modern global warming

While reviewing the bounty of solar and climate information found at the Global Warming Science site, we found the adjacent chart (this is the 'C3' revised version using annual HadCRUT global temperatures instead of monthly).

Clearly, there is a strong relationship between solar activity (magnetic solar flux) and global temperatures.

The relationship is not perfect but it represents a significant improvement over the incredibly lame human-CO2 and global warming / climate change relationship claimed by the IPCC's anti-CO2 Climategate scientists and alarmists.

Read here. From the original 1999 study:

"The solar wind, because it is an extended ionized gas of very high electrical conductivity, drags some magnetic flux out of the Sun, thereby filling the heliosphere with the weak interplanetary magnetic field. Magnetic reconnection - the merging of oppositely-directed magnetic fields such that they become connected to each other - between the interplanetary field and the Earth's magnetic field, allows energy from the solar wind to enter the near-Earth environment. The Sun's properties, such as its luminosity, are related to its magnetic field, though the connections are as yet not well understood. Moreover, changes in the heliospheric magnetic field have been linked with changes in total cloud cover over the Earth, which may influence global climate change. Here we report that the measurements of the near-Earth interplanetary magnetic field reveal that the total magnetic field leaving the sun has risen by a factor 1.4 since 1964." [M. Lockwood, R. Stamper, and M.N. Wild 1999: Nature]

Read here. From a 1999 review of this study:

"The authors examined measurements of near-earth interplanetary magnetic field to determine the total magnetic flux leaving the sun since 1868...authors were able to show that the total magnetic flux leaving the sun has risen by a factor of 1.41 over the period 1964-1996.  Surrogate measurements of the interplanetary magnetic field previous to this time indicate that this parameter has increased by a factor of 2.3 since 1901...results of this study lead us to wonder just how much of the reported 0.6°C global temperature rise of the last century might be a result of the more than two-fold increase in the total magnetic solar flux over that period.  We may now, at long last, be moving closer than ever in our effort to understand the importance of the sun in driving 20th century climate change."

Previous solar-climate and peer-reviewed postings. Solar/cosmic temperature charts.

Global Warming: A U.S. Presidential Candidate Actually Uses His Common Sense & Scientific Evidence

Ron Paul makes candid comments regarding global warming and climate change - employs empirical evidence instead of highly speculative predictions

Read here. 'C3' readers are well aware that there is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that human CO2 emissions will cause rapid global warming with catastrophic climate change being the result. Likewise, 'C3' readers know well that all the global climate models have an absolutely atrocious record regarding their catastrophic climate predictions.

It would appear Ron Paul agrees and approaches the global warming issue and human CO2 emissions with a reliance on empirical-based science, not the Ouijia-board science of climate model predictions.

"I try to look at global warming the same way I look at all other serious issues: as objectively and open-minded as possible. There is clear evidence that the temperatures in some parts of the globe are rising, but temperatures are cooling in other parts. The average surface temperature had risen for several decades, but it fell back substantially in the past few years...Clearly there is something afoot. The question is: Is the upward fluctuation in temperature man-made or part of a natural phenomenon."

It's refreshing to hear a candidate who does not pander to the climate hysteria of the anti-science left / liberal mainstream press.

Data Confirmation: UK Temperature Change Not A Result of Higher CO2 Levels

Per the famous Central England Temperature dataset, the long predicted global warming apocalypse from CO2 is not happening

(click on charts to enlarge)

The adjacent chart is a plot of the oldest temperature record available: the Central England Temperature dataset.

Despite massive amounts of CO2 emissions over the last 60 years, the long-term trend remains well below a one degree (+0.26°C) increase per century rate.

As the inset chart reveals, the more recent 10-year trend has the representative UK region cooling at an amazing -8.7°C per century rate (a -7.7°C decrease by year 2100).

The following chart is a plot of one-year temperature changes (moving 12-month), with the historical CO2 levels depicted. Clearly, one-year temperature changes are not getting larger, and ever larger, as an "accelerated" warming climate would require.

The red curve is a twenty-year average of the temperature changes, which  indicates no long-term influence on CET temperature change by CO2 levels, natural or human.

Conclusion: UK citizens need not worry about "rapid," "accelerating" and "irreversible" warming. There is no credible empirical evidence supporting such CO2-AGW alarmism.

Additional modern and historical temperature charts. Data Sources: CET & CO2. Charts created with Excel. Note: Linear trends are not predictions.

Scientists Predicted Australia Would Become The 'Drought' Continent: They Were Wrong

Read here, here and here.

As this updated climate map reveals, the severe drought condition for Australia during 2011 was essentially non-existent. The IPCC-based climate science predicted more frequent and intense droughts, which has not been the case.

Previous severe-weather and failed-prediction postings. Severe-weather charts.

Global Warming & U.S. Severe Weather: Latest Data Reveals There To Be No Link

Due to the incredibly bad reporting by the mainstream press, many Americans believe the U.S. suffers from "accelerated warming" and increasing severe weather - neither are true

First, as the adjacent chart reveals, U.S. temperatures are not "accelerating." The red curve is the 12-month moving average (since 1895), which clearly shows no acceleration, and shows zero relationship to the growing levels of atmospheric CO2 levels (black dots).

As can be seen, U.S. monthly temperatures have a wide variation (the blue up/down plot) in any given year, fluctuating between low and high extremes.

Again, no "accelerating" warming trend is evident from the actual temperature empirical evidence. (click on charts to enlarge)

Read here. This second chart plots the total number of severe tornadoes (F2, F3, F4 & F5) in decade groups (the 2000's include 2011). This actual empirical evidence substantiates that severe weather events, as represented by extreme tornadoes, are not increasing in the U.S.

Conclusion: The mainstream press (eg., NYT, WaPo, Time, CBS, NBC, LA Times, etc.) willfully and unequivocally reports misinformation regarding severe weather and global warming. They do so to purposefully mislead the public and policymakers regarding global warming and climate change.

Previous severe-weather postings. Modern temperatures and severe-weather charts.

World's Best Ocean Scientists Confirm Skeptics Correct: Ocean Acidification Hysteria Is Unwarranted

'Big Green' anti-science and mainstream media's hysterical reporting on ocean acidification has been proven to be meritless - rising ocean acidification is not a problem

Read here. New empirical research determines that extreme variation in pH levels of sea waters occurs naturally and frequently. The extremes are so great that marine life is often exposed to "acidified" waters without being threatened in the course of daily life.

Human CO2 emissions are not causing the extreme pH ranges currently existing in sea waters.

The peer-reviewed research by Hofman et al completely vindicates the skeptics' position of ocean acidification and thoroughly exposes the common alarmist position - hysterical leftist / liberal / progressive anti-science that is never able to withstand the scrutiny of scientific empirical research.

"The authors draw two conclusions: (1) most non-open ocean sites vary a lot, and (2) and some spots vary so much they reach the “extreme” pH’s forecast for the doomsday future scenarios on a daily (a daily!) basis."..."Here, we present a compilation of continuous, high-resolution time series of upper ocean pH, collected using autonomous sensors, over a variety of ecosystems ranging from polar to tropical, open-ocean to coastal, kelp forest to coral reef. These observations reveal a continuum of month-long pH variability with standard deviations from 0.004 to 0.277 and ranges spanning 0.024 to 1.430 pH units. The nature of the observed variability was also highly site-dependent, with characteristic diel, semi-diurnal, and stochastic patterns of varying amplitudes. These biome-specific pH signatures disclose current levels of exposure to both high and low dissolved CO2, often demonstrating that resident organisms are already experiencing pH regimes that are not predicted until 2100." [Gretchen E. Hofmann, Jennifer E. Smith, Kenneth S. Johnson, Uwe Send, Lisa A. Levin, Fiorenza Micheli, Adina Paytan, Nichole N. Price, Brittany Peterson, Yuichiro Takeshita, Paul G. Matson, Elizabeth Derse Crook, Kristy J. Kroeker, Maria Cristina Gambi, Emily B. Rivest, Christina A. Frieder, Pauline C. Yu, Todd R. Martz 2011: Plos One]

Previous ocean-acidification and peer-reviewed postings.

The IPCC's Killing Machines: Unable To Predict Accurately, IPCC Climate Models Ultimately Cause Deaths

Policymakers reliance on the significantly wrong United Nations' IPCC climate model predictions is leading to needless death and suffering - East Africa is recent example

Read here. Map source here. Both recent peer reviewed empirical research and anecdotal evidence clearly indicate that the UN's IPCC's climate models are notoriously wrong.

Not only have its models been conclusively wrong about CO2-caused global warming over the last 15 years, but the climate models' regional predictions are often diametrically opposite of reality. These bad regional predictions are causing policymakers to make incredibly stupid decisions based on an IPCC computer simulation, which ultimately causes needless deaths and suffering.

Egregiously wrong regional IPCC forecasts for East Africa are the latest example of these worthless, killer climate model predictions:

"The quality of the global models are too poor to give any clear information about regional climate change. We can state for the various regions, where there is some information, to what extend there is agreement between models etc. However, even agreement amongst models does not at this stage allow for any thorough assessment about uncertainties about changes."

""We thought trouble was coming“, describing “how his group last year forecast the drought in Somalia that is now turning into famine — and how that warning wasn’t enough” and in particular lamenting that: The global climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were never intended to provide rainfall trend projections for every region. These models say that East Africa will become wetter, yet observations show substantial declines in spring rainfall in recent years. Despite this, several agencies are building long-term plans on the basis of the forecast of wetter conditions."

NOAA Research Documents The Robust Cooling of U.S. Over Last 15 Years, "Global Warming" Non-Existent

The NOAA / NCDC climate research group published year-end U.S. temperature data confirming that U.S. is still cooling - CO2 has zero global warming impact on U.S.

As the Climategate 2.0 emails continue to establish, the alarmist climate scientists claiming "unprecedented" and "accelerating" global warming actually can't find either. When examining the global temperature trends, it is clear that global warming has actually been missing for the last 15 years. This has definitely been the case of the continental U.S., as the chart below depicts. (click on to enlarge)

This "global cooling" of the U.S continues in spite of growing CO2 emissions. Human CO2 emissions continue to grow at a business-as-usual pace with a record set in 2010 for the largest emissions ever.

The NOAA/NCDC chart on the left represents the 15 years (180 months), starting January 1, 1997 and ending December 31, 2011. Per these latest U.S. official temperature data records, the 12-month period ending December was the 5th coldest December-ending period for the last 15 years.

In terms of a single month, December 2011 was the 22nd warmest since 1895 (December 1998 was the warmest).

The per century cooling trend of this period, a minus 4.4°F, took place despite the huge warmth produced by two large El Niño events during this 15-year span: 1997-1998 and 2009-2010.

For the 10-year period ending December 2011 (Januart 1, 2002 thru December, 2011 - 120 months), the cooling trend accelerates to a very significant minus 7.2°F per century rate - again, per the updated NOAA/NCDC temperature records.

Please note: The  linear temperature trend, as shown in the NOAA chart, is not a prediction.

Other modern temperature charts. Historical and fabrication-temperature charts that support the position of global warming skeptics

Scientists Confirm Sea Level Rise Is Well Below Hysterical Predictions of IPCC

New Zealand empirical research completely deflates wild predictions of IPCC's Rahmstorf and other global warming alarmists such as Heidi Cullen

Read here. The IPCC has literally been wrong with almost 100% of their catastrophic climate predictions. The latest confirmation of their prediction incompetence is the failure of the seas to rise to dangerous levels per latest New Zealand tide gauge data.

New peer research found, In a nutshell, that seas around New Zealand have been rising at only a 7 inch per century rate. That is a fraction of the IPCC's worst case scenario prediction that the mainstream press exclusively reports.

Previous sea-level and failed-prediction postings. Sea-level charts.

Latest Satellite Data: Human CO2 Emissions Have Caused Earth To Cool Over Past 15 Years

Satellite measurements confirm that global warming has stopped over the last 15 years despite large increases of atmospheric CO2 levels

The chart on the left has to be extremely painful and embarrassing for the IPCC's Climategate alarmists and their 'big green' and MSM comrades.

Despite the large increases of atmospheric CO2 levels, the global temperatures have barely increased - contrary to predictions from the IPCC, NOAA and NASA's GISS. Per the linear trend of the adjacent chart, the projected temperature increase by year 2100 will only be a ludicrously tiny +0.05 degree (yes, only 1/20th of a single degree).

The grey curve/background indicates the monotonous growth of CO2 levels, while the blue curve reveals temperatures trending slightly cooler over the last 15 years. One could easily surmise from this chart that increased CO2 levels (due to human CO2 emissions) have actually "cooled" the planet since the earth-fever of the 1997-98 El Niño event.

Obviously, the satellite provides further empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are very unlikely to be a major force driving global temperatures and/or climate change. The lack of observable correlation between monthly temperatures and monthly CO2 levels is stunning.

And here's a 'C3' prediction to take to the bank: the mainstream press will not provide its readers and viewers with this actual satellite data that literally contradicts their past hysterical "global-warming reporting."

Additional modern and historical temperature charts. Source of temperature and CO2 data for above Excel chart. [Note: linear trends are not predictions]

NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab: Major Impact On Arctic Sea Ice Melt Is Nature's Own 'Arctic Oscillation'

Scientists from Jet Propulsion Lab and Univ. of Washington determine that fresh water from Russia's rivers and the Arctic Oscillation are major factors for Arctic sea ice melt

Read here. The 'Big Green' controlled IPCC and the typical Climategate scientist have publicly claimed that the recent Arctic sea ice melt is entirely due to human CO2 emissions. The majority of climate scientists don't agree with this IPCC stance, knowing full well that other natural and human influences are at work in the Arctic.

New research, by scientists from the University of Washington and NASA's Jet propulsion Lab, have now discovered that freshwater from several large Russian rivers is being relocated to certain regions in the Arctic that allows other regions to be more vulnerable to increased sea ice melt. The force that is redirecting freshwater is not human CO2 but instead nature's own Arctic Oscillation.

This latest research confirms that any speculation of human CO2 emissions being the major cause of sea ice melting is likely very wrong. (image source)

"A hemisphere-wide phenomenon – and not just regional forces – has caused record-breaking amounts of freshwater to accumulate in the Arctic’s Beaufort Sea"..."Frigid freshwater flowing into the Arctic Ocean from three of Russia’s mighty rivers was diverted hundreds of miles to a completely different part of the ocean in response to a decades-long shift in atmospheric pressure associated with the phenomenon called the Arctic Oscillation"..."In the Eurasian Basin, the change means less freshwater enters the layer known as the cold halocline and could be contributing to declines in ice in that part of the Arctic...The cold halocline normally sits like a barrier between ice and warm water that comes into the Arctic from the Atlantic Ocean. Without salt the icy cold freshwater is lighter, which is why it is able to float over the warm water...In the Beaufort Sea, the water is the freshest it’s been in 50 years of record keeping, he said. The new findings show that only a tiny fraction is from melting ice and the vast majority is Eurasian river water."

New Unequivocal Empirical Evidence: Antarctica's Past Climate Warmer Than Modern, Over Last 450 Years

New Antarctica evidence conclusively refutes IPCC global warming scientists' speculation that modern temperatures are "unprecedented" and "accelerating" higher

Read here. The UN's IPCC attempted to convince the public and policymakers that there was a scientific "consensus" that the last 150 years have witnessed "accelerating" global warming that is "unprecedented."

Instead, the evidence now points to the IPCC and its Climategate scientists conspiring to mislead. Thankfully, the vast majority of the world's scientists do not believe in the IPCC's climate political-science proclamations and thus continue performing/producing empirical research to determine the science truth.

The non-IPCC research team of Thamban et al is an example of this and the adjacent chart (click to enlarge) is a product of their research: Antarctica's modern temperatures are not unusual, nor are they rapidly warming versus what has occurred naturally in the historical past. As the evidence clearly shows, a natural warming has been taking place over the last 400+ years.

"Working with an ice core (IND-22/B4) that had been extracted during the austral summer of 2003 from the coastal region of Dronning Maud Land, East Antarctica... -- the authors developed 470-year histories of δ18O and δD that "showed similar down core fluctuations with [an] excellent positive relationship (R2 = 0.9; n = 216) between the two."..."the estimated surface air temperature at the core site revealed a significant warming of 2.7°C with a warming of ~0.6°C per century for the past 470 years."..."...Thamban et al.'s results clearly indicate that all three of these climate-alarmist claims are false in regard to this portion of the planet's southern polar region." [Meloth Thamban, C. M. Laluraj, Sushant S. Naik and Arun Chaturvedi 2011: Journal of the Geological Society of India]

Previous climate-history and peer-reviewed postings. Historical and modern temperature charts.

NOAA Climate Scientists Gone Wild: Bizarro Temperature Data Fabrication Continues

The embarrassing outright fabrication of the global temperature dataset continues at NOAA / NCDC - Obama's anti-science regime not challenged by the mainstream press

How bizarre is changing historical temperatures, all the way back to 1880, on a monthly basis? Recently, we wrote about NOAA's monthly temperature revisionism and the political, anti-science agenda that's driving it, global warming alarmism. [Ed: part III here]

Well, it's definitely bizarre science since other major climate agencies are not doing the same.

Amazingly though, the NOAA / NCDC agencies are now seemingly dissatisfied with just monthly fabrications. They apparently have now embraced almost daily revisionism of historical temperatures.

Although we did not check the NOAA / NCDC dataset on a daily basis during the month of December, we did check six times, downloading six different historical datasets. Did we say bizarro? (image source)

There is no rational explanation for continuously fabricating a new historical temperature dataset multiple times during a month, let alone a year. [Note: You can download the six December 2012 revisions of historical data by Obama's "science" team here.]

Of course, the mainstream press (e.g. NYT, WaPo, CNN, LA Times, BBC, Newsweek, CBS, MSNBC, etc.) refuses to report on the actual bogus and fraud Bernie Madoff-like science that is being perpetrated by their comrades in the climate science bureaucracy. Obviously, for the left / liberal / progressive / Democrat anti-science mindset, fabricating empirical evidence is not bizarro.....

• From Wikipedia: "...introduced the strange speech patterns that became synonymous with the character, with all of Bizarro's comments meaning the opposite (e.g.. "bad" means "good")."

[Editor's special note: The NOAA/NCDC revisions this post is about are entire historical temperature dataset revisions being done multiple times per year and even multiple times per month (December 2011). We are not referring to the common practice of revising the temperatures of a few recent months that is done by all climate agencies frequently.]

Nasa's Hansen's Latest Analysis Confirms Minor Ocean Warming: A Tiny Increase of Only +0.15°C By 2100

New peer reviewed study by James Hansen of NASA / GISS measures recent ocean heat content and his data indicates insignificant warming - thus, oceans by year 2100 will not warm much

Read here. Willis Eschenbach does the number crunching on the Hansen et al 2011 analysis that earth has a serious energy imbalance, and this "imbalance" is represented by an ocean warming equivalent of 0.54 W/m2 of energy over the period of 2005 - 2010.

Now, +0.54 W/m2 sounds like a very serious energy imbalance indeed until one translates what that means in degrees Celsius of ocean warming, then projecting that "warming" out to year 2100. That is exactly what Willis's number crunching did and he discovered that based on Hansen's "serious" energy imbalance that oceans will warm by a laughable and by a barely measurable amount of:

+0.15C degree by 2100 AD

Above is the formula that Willis used to convert the "serious" imbalance into actual degrees warming

Adjacent, is an Excel representation of calculations done by Willis. (click to enlarge)

You can download this 'C3' Excel file to examine/play with the calcs. (If you find an error in our representation of Willis's work, please email us.)

Modern and historical temperature charts.