There will be maps of areas vulnerable to sea level rise and virtual reality viewers to visualize our future coastline. The open house events are the next
Have the last 5 years been the warmest on record?
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the 5 year temp. data is accurate which it is not because of fudged data for the much warmer dirty thirties.
This short 5 year weather data is irrelevant noise and of no value in knowing what is happening to the climate. No trend is possible over 5 years and even 100 years is too short.
We can illustrate the time scale effect by looking at the data over the following years – 20, 100, 1000 and 7000 60 m. Only the long many centuries shows a recognizable trends WEATHER DATA ONLY MATTERS FOR TRENDS WITH MORE THAN CENTURIES OTHERWISE IT IS SIMPLY UNRELIABLE NOISE.
Indeed no doubt the recent claim of global warming revised to climate change as temperatures plunged erred because the scientists were fooled by the randomness of climate history.
Further, global temperatures are in a long term decline and 5 years is an irrelevant blip where time is measured in centuries not even decades. We are in an ice age and it would be wonderful if it the temperature was rising but it is not. There are oscillation that do not change the trend line.
THE LONGER THE TIME SCALE THE MORE ACCURATE ARE TEMPERATURE TRENDS. SEE 60 MILLION YEARS –
Tthe 5 year claim is false because it depends on tampered data. Historical temp data edited to make the past cooler and present warmer. The drought ridden temperatures during the dirty thirties were revised downward REALITY WAS ADJUSTED OUT OF EXISTENCE BY NASA.
You can fudge data but you cannot remove reality burned into historic photos and famous literature of the thirties drought from excessive heat.
Gwyn Morgan: If CO2 is to blame, how do you explain the Dirty Thirties?
During the Great Depression, CO2 levels were 25 per cent lower than today’s but severe climate change led to the Dirty Thirties
June 2, 2016, 7:14 a.m. |
Image: Canadian Encyclopedia
The collapse of global commodity prices was sudden and severe. Workers coming off a decade of unprecedented prosperity suddenly found themselves jobless and unable to provide for their beleaguered families.
For a time, they maintained hope that the downturn would be temporary, but as the first year stretched into the second, many lost hope. Some who had come from provinces of high unemployment to participate in the Alberta boom began their glum journey back. Laidoff workers saw a glimmer of hope when commodity prices appeared to bottom out. At the very least, it seemed, things wouldn’t get worse.
Then nature unleashed a crushing conflagration. Searing winds swept across drought-stricken farms and forests. A young boy comes running breathlessly into the house shouting to his mom, “There’s a big black cloud in the sky.” They hurry outside to behold a terrifying sight in the western sky that would force the family out of their home and into an uncertain future.
This is not, as it may seem, the story of the global oil price collapse combined with the Fort McMurray wildfire. The commodity price collapse in this story was caused by the economic earthquake of 1929 that launched the Great Depression. And the conflagration was the extremely hot and dry weather that turned the fertile prairie “breadbasket” into a drought-stricken wasteland. That black cloud was caused by hundreds of millions of tonnes of topsoil being blown away by the wind.
Impoverished farmers, hoping for an early end to the drought, were encouraged by a couple of years of improved weather. But it was only a temporary respite. The summers of 1936 and 1937 brought an abrupt reversal that proved even hotter, drier and windier. Tens of thousands of farms were abandoned in what is remembered as the Dirty Thirties, displacing 250,000 people whose only skill set was farming.
Inexplicably, the devastatingly hot conditions reversed in 1940, with the arrival of a cooling period that would last until 1975.
Since the Fort McMurray disaster, some have blamed the very product the people work to produce as the cause of the hot, dry weather that nurtured the wildfires. But analysis of temperature data over the past century shows some startling facts. First, the 1930s were by far the hottest period. Of the 10 highest temperature days ever recorded in Canada, seven occurred in the 1930s. And none of those top 10 temperature records were set during the past decade. Yet the atmospheric concentration of CO2 in the 1930s was some 25 per cent lower than today’s levels.
While theories abound, scientists have not been able to explain why, during a period of such low CO2 levels, such an abrupt shift from a long period of moderate temperatures and ample rainfall to devastatingly hot and dry conditions could occur. Likewise, scientists struggle to explain the equally sudden shift in 1940 that saw a 35-year-long cooling period even as greenhouse gas emissions rapidly increased.
But whatever the answer to that question, one thing is crystal clear: Tying any single extreme weather event to atmospheric CO2 concentrations simply isn’t historically or scientifically credible.
The Fort McMurray fires took about one million barrels per day out of production. But did that reduce global consumption of fossil fuels? Of course not. Countries including Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Angola and Ivory Coast quickly filled the void.
Not only do these countries have appalling human rights records but, as we have become painfully aware, some of the proceeds from their sales are funnelled to extremist groups who shatter the lives of people throughout the Middle East and North African region and foment terror across the west.
Those who celebrated the Fort McMurray disaster as divine environmental justice need to know this: Shutting down the Canadian oilsands altogether would reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by a minuscule one-10th of a per cent, only to be replaced by oil from countries whose environmental and human rights records are vastly inferior to Canada’s.
My vote goes to the made-in-Canada oil produced by those resilient, hard-working Canadians who have been forced to endure job loses, destructive wildfires and environmental extremist schadenfreude as they proudly anchor a crucial economic cornerstone of our country.
I’ll take the values contained in their made-in-Canada oil over that Middle Eastern and North African stuff any day.
© 2016 Distributed by Troy Media
THE SUN IS INACTIVE AND EARTH IS COOLING.
This claim of 5 years warmest is impossible and or irrelevant because it is just a short bump. The claim is bunk and the authors are fooled by randomness.
Climate alarmists are so arrogant they think natural climate variations stopped around 150 years ago? The climate is always warming and cooling, always has always will. Recent modern warming, not outside the realms of natural variability. #ClimateChange #AGW pic.twitter.com/HpGuhSnTSY
— Paul Carfoot (@PaulCarfoot) September 30, 2019
Climate alarmists are so arrogant they think natural climate variations stopped around 150 years ago? The climate is always warming and cooling, always has always will. Recent modern warming, not outside the realms of natural variability.
The History Of NASA/NOAA Temperature Corruption
This pattern of NASA making the past cooler and the present warmer has occurred repeatedly since NASA became chartered with proving global warming. The past keeps getting colder.
In 1974, The National Center For Atmospheric Research (NCAR) generated this graph of global temperatures, showing a large spike in the 1940’s, rapid cooling to 1970 and net cooling from 1900 to 1970.
In 1975, the National Academy of Sciences published a very similar graph for Northern hemisphere temperatures, which also showed net cooling from 1900 to 1970.
Page 148 :
By 1981, the graph had started to tilt to the left. Temperatures in 1970 were now about 0.1C warmer than 1900.
Not surprisingly, this change coincided with James Hansen’s interest in demonstrating a CO2 driven warming trend.
This pattern of NASA making the past cooler and the present warmer has occurred repeatedly since NASA became chartered with proving global warming. The past keeps getting colder.
The next graph shows how 1880-2000 global warming has been doubled since 2001, simply by altering the data. This graph is normalized to the most recent common years of the 1990’s.
The NASA temperature data is based on NOAA GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network) data. The map below shows where their stations are located, with gray representing no data. They are missing data for about half of the Earth’s surface including most of Africa, Antarctica and Greenland. The only places with complete coverage are the US and Western Europe. The gray areas are filled in with computer modeled temperatures, meaning that about 50% of the global data used by NASA and NOAA is fake.
The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time — Part XX
February 19, 2019/ Francis MentonSince last October, this series has been sitting at the rather awkward number of 19 (or “XIX”) posts.
Time to round it off at an even XX.For those new to this topic, the Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time is the systematic downward adjustment of early-year temperatures in order to create a fake enhanced warming trend, the better to bamboozle voters and politicians to go along with extreme measures to try to avert the impending “climate crisis.” Prior posts in this series have documented large and unexplained downward adjustments at hundreds of stations around the world that are used by official government organizations (in the US, primarily NOAA and NASA) to wipe out early-year high temperatures and thereby proclaim that the latest month or year is “the hottest ever!” To read all prior posts in this series, go to this link.You might ask, with the extensive exposure of these unsupportable downward adjustments of early-year temperatures by official government organizations — accompanied by highly credible accusations of scientific fraud — haven’t the adjusters been cowed by now into a smidgeon of honesty? It sure doesn’t look that way.
The latest news comes out of Australia, via the website of Joanne Nova. Nova’s February 17 post is titled “History keeps getting colder — ACORN2 raises Australia’s warming rate by over 20%.” “ACORN2” is a newly revised and updated temperature series for Australia, with temperatures going back to 1910 based on records from 112 weather stations on the continent, some 57 of which have records that go back all the way to the 1910 start date. “ACORN” stands for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network. The ACORN2 data compilation is so called to distinguish it from ACORN1, which was only released some 7 years ago in 2012.
The people who put out these things are the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.According to Nova, the latest temperature adjustments were released “oh-so-quietly.” I guess that the plan is just to start using the new figures as the historical comparisons and bet that journalists will be too stupid or ignorant to figure out that the earlier temperatures have been altered. That’s actually a pretty good bet. However, down in Australia they do have a hard-working group of independent researchers who are on top of this issue. One of them is Nova, and another is Chris Gillham. Gillham has done his own very detailed analysis of the adjustments in the ACORN2 report, and has also put up a post on same at Watts Up With That.
So there is plenty of information out there for intelligent people to make an independent judgment.A few excerpts from Nova:Once again we find that the oldest thermometers were apparently reading artificially high, even though many were newish in 1910 and placed in approved Stevenson screens. This is also despite the additional urban warming effect of a population that grew 400% since then. What are the odds?! Fortunately . . ., sorry scientists have uncovered the true readings from the old biased thermometers which they explain carefully in a 67 page impenetrable document. . . . The new ACORN version has nearly doubled the rate of warming in the minima of the longest running stations.Nova has put together several charts to show the magnitude of the adjustments, not only from ACORN1 to ACORN2, but also from the prior AWAP compilation to ACORN1. To no one’s surprise, each round of adjustments makes the earlier years cooler, and thus enhances the apparent warming trend. Here is Nova’s chart showing the amount of warming from the beginning to the end of the series, for each of AWAP, ACORN1 and ACORN2, and for minimum, mean and maximum temperatures:
For example, the average minimum temperature had increased over the century covered by 0.84 deg C in the AWAP series. That increased to 1.02 deg C in the ACORN1 series, and to 1.22 deg C in the ACORN2 series.You need to go over to Gillham’s work to see how these changes derive mostly from decreases in early-year temperatures. Here is a chart from Gillham on the changes to minimum temperatures at the 57 stations that go back all the way to the 1910 start:As you can see, the “raw” and “v1” temperatures tend to be close — sometimes one higher, sometimes the other. But v2 is significantly lower across the board in the earlier years. Then, suddenly, in the recent years, it tracks the “raw” almost matter, as the Brits at the Hadley Center in the UK?If your brain is wondering how that could be, I would suggest that we have the same kind of phenomenon going on here as the hate crime hoax phenomenon. How does Jussie Smollett just happen to fake a hate crime playing right into the progressive narrative of the moment — just as did the Duke lacrosse team hoaxer, and the Virginia fraternity hoaxer, and the Harvard Law School black tape hoaxers, and many dozens of others? (Here is a compilation of some 15 recent hate crime hoaxes.) Did they all coordinate in one grand conspiracy? Or did they all just realize what was needed from them to support their “team” and its narrative?they offer a justification for these downward adjustments? Yes, but nothing remotely satisfactory. The one-word explanation is “homogenization.” OK, we understand what that is. For example, sometimes a station moves, and that causes a discontinuity, where, say, the new location is systematically 0.1 deg C lower than the old. An adjustment needs to be made. But these sorts of adjustments should cancel out. How is it possible that every time some official meteorological organization anywhere in the world makes some of these “homogenization” adjustments, the result is that earlier years get colder and the supposed “global warming” trend gets enhanced — always to support a narrative of “climate crisis.”Well, fortunately, this time the Australian Bureau of Meteorology has put out a very long 57-page document explaining what they have done. Here it is. Is it any help?As far as I am concerned, this is the definitive proof of the fraud. If this were even an attempt at real, credible science, the proponents would put out a document complete with the details of the adjustments — and all of their computer code — so that an independent researcher could replicate the work. Nothing like that is here. This is pure bafflegab. Nova calls it “impenetrable,” which is way too nice a word as far as I’m concerned. Let me give you a small taste:3. HOMOGENISATION METHODS3.1 Detection of inhomogeneities – use of multiple detection methods in parallelIn version 1 of ACORN-SAT, a single statistical method for detection of inhomogeneities was used (Trewin, 2012). This method was based closely on the Pairwise Homogenisation Algorithm (PHA) developed by Menne and Williams (2009), and involves pairwise comparison of data between the candidate station and all sufficiently well-correlated stations in the region, with the Standard Normal Homogeneity Test (SNHT) (Alexandersson, 1986) used to identify significant breakpoints in the difference series. The test was carried out separately on monthly mean anomalies (as a single time series with 12 data points per year), and seasonal mean anomalies, with a breakpoint flagged for further assessment if it was identified in either the monthly series, or (within a window of ± 1 year) in at least two of the four seasons. Further details of the implementation of the PHA in the ACORN-SAT dataset are available in Trewin (2012).A range of other detection methods have been developed in recent years, many of which were the subject of the COST-HOME intercomparison project (Venema et al., 2012). Three of these methods were selected for use in ACORN-SAT version 2, the selection primarily based on ease of implementation. These methods were:• • HOMER version 2.6, joint detection (Mestre et al., 2013)• • MASH version 3.03 (Szentimrey, 2008).• • RHTests version 4 (Wang et al., 2010).All of these methods, which use different statistical approaches, have been successfully used across a range of networks since their development. Further details on their implementation are given in Appendix favorite part is that reference at the end to “Appendix C.” This document has no Appendix C. There are three appendices, numbered Appendix 1, Appendix 2 and Appendix 3. That’s about the intellectual level we are dealing with.Anyway, try going to this document and see if you can figure out what they are doing. Believe me, you can’t.And finally: over the years as I have accumulated posts on this topic, several commenters have suggested that I must be alleging some kind of conspiracy among government climate scientists in making these adjustments. I mean, without that, how does it come about that the Australians just happen to be making the exact same kinds of adjustments as NASA, NOAA, and for that
Temperatures are falling not rising by 0.4* C over the past few years.
We are in an ice age and only just recovering from the very recent Little Ice Age so more warming is great and is certainly nothing to try to stop.
If the temperature was so hot the last 5 years why is there a hockey stick increase in Arctic ice?
The Antarctic is larger in size than the USA and the weather has not been above zero since 1960. The earth is still in an ice age and polar ice is the most relevant indicia.
Where did the claim of 5 warmest years come from because if it is climate models they are false.
The US has the best and only reliable weather stations going back 100 years and they clearly show temperatures declining (see graph) as you would expect when we are recording weather during an ice age.
“MILDER WINTER TEMPERATURES WILL DECREASE HEAVY SNOWSTORMS”
False prediction of the UN in 2001, although the reason made sense as part of the theory that global warming was happening at break neck speed. Winter weather is surely key to any real evidence of climate change from the current ice age interglacial to tropical like climate. The very definition of an ice age is about polar ice being present annually and as long as there is lots of winter snow the glaciers are not going away. The moderate winter projection could not be wrong.. as in factl winters have been early everywhere with heavy snowfall and brutal storms. This key winter evidence means there is no unnatural global warming only the recovery from the Little Ice Age during cyclical warming ocean currents.
For every action, there’s an equal and opposite reaction. In weather, that tends to be hot/dry and cold/snow. In 2000, scientists at CRU said snow is a thing of the past. IPCC, 2001: “Milder winter temps. will decrease heavy snowstorms.” But now they cause it? Makes no sense.
7:10 AM · Sep 30, 2019·
Robert W. Felix
Sun, 29 Sep 2019 19:39 UTC
© Karen Manzer
This will be a “Major To Historic Winter Storm in the northern Rockies,” warns the National Weather Service.
“A powerful storm system will produce several feet or more of wet, heavy snow; and gusty winds in the Northern Rockies,” says the NWS. “Snow is also forecast along the Rocky Mountain Front, portions of the Great Basin, and other northwestern Mountains. Trees with leaves will be vulnerable to damage. Heavy snow and strong winds will make travel difficult to impossible in places.”
The trees are still fully loaded with foliage, so the strong winds and heavy, wet snow is expected is to bring down trees and power lines leading to widespread power outages.
As of Sunday morning,weather maps showed snow or snow showers in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario.
Man wades through deep snow, enjoys it
— Kyle Brittain (@KyleTWN) September 29, 2019
The winterlike storm is unleashing feet of snow and life-threatening conditions in northwestern US, warned Accuweather.
East-facing slopes of the Sawtooth, Flathead and Lewis and Clark ranges in Montana will experience the heaviest amount of snow, 2-3 feet (60-91 cm) to as much as 65 inches (122 cm).
However, a general 1-2 feet (30-60 cm) of snow will fall over the mountains with anywhere from a bit of slush to several inches of snow at low elevations.
Bitter cold to last for days
Perhaps even worse is that residents who lose power will face subfreezing temperatures approaching zero F in some areas, says accuweather.
These bitterly cold conditions are expected to last for days after the storm.
Global-warming adherents warn of cataclysmic consequences years down the road, but this ‘winterlike’ storm is producing life-threatening conditions right now.
Which would you prefer? Global warming? Or almost sub-zero temperatures with no heat or electricity?
❄️ SNOW will become “A very rare/exciting event. Children aren’t going to know what snow is.” – Dr. Viner (2000)
❄️ “Goodbye winter. Never again snow?” Spiegel (2000)
❄️ “..decrease heavy snowstorms” IPCC (2001)
❄️ “End of Snow?” NYTimes (2014) https://t.co/viCi8EDdjT via @JWSpry https://t.co/hL07VgAXWj
— JWSpry 🇦🇶 (@JWSpry) September 30, 2019
SNOW will become “A very rare/exciting event. Children aren’t going to know what snow is.” – Dr. Viner (2000)
“Goodbye winter. Never again snow?” Spiegel (2000)
“..decrease heavy snowstorms” IPCC (2001)
“End of Snow?” NYTimes (2014)via
Thanks to Roger Higgs for this.
There are many studies that show climate scientists have tampered with temperature data to make the climate appear warmer than reality. The most outrageous was Michael Mann erasing the accepted science of the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age to claim unprecedented warming today. FALSE.
Ball attacked Mann who sued Ball for libel and lost last month in the Supreme Court of BC.
UPDATE – Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann “hides the decline” AGAIN
Anthony Watts / August 22, 2019
Original title before update: Breaking: Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann has to pay
See the update below.
Readers surely recall that the easily offended Dr. Michael Mann launched a court case for defamation against climate skeptic Dr. Tim Ball of Canada.
In Feburary 2018 there was a complete dismissal in the lawsuit brought against Dr. Ball by Andrew Weaver of Canada, also for “defamation”.
The Weaver defamation case involved an article Ball wrote saying that the IPCC had diverted almost all climate research funding and scientific investigation to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). This meant that there was virtually no advance in the wider understanding of climate and climate change. Ball referenced an interview with Weaver and attempts by a student to arrange a debate. Ball made some comments that were not fully substantiated, so they became the base of the defamation lawsuit.
That case was completely dismissed, you can read more here.
Now in the Mann case, which goes back to 2011, there’s also a complete dismissal. Ball wrote to me less than an hour ago, asking me to announce it here.
Michael Mann’s case against me was dismissed this morning by the BC Supreme Court and they awarded me [court] costs.
This is a developing story, I’ll add more as we know more.
NASA pulls climate data out of hats like rabbits
By|September 1st, 2019| |
Late last year NASA scientist Martin Mlynczak, announced that the Earth may be cooling. It was surprise because data manipulation has been going on for many years at both NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency) and NASA (National Aeronautic and Space Agency).
The most current temperature curves produced by these agencies track well with the increases in man’s carbon dioxide emissions in recent decades. However a few years earlier the data presented looked nothing like that of more recent times.
For years Climate activists in charge of NOAA and NASA were surprised that their own data and satellite measurements had been showing the climate to be stable or cooling since 1998 while CO2 levels had continued to rise. They were under intense pressure to explain how this could be in the face of all the alarmist reports put out by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It was time to resort to the strategy that progressives use in times of crisis. If you do not like the facts, ignore them. The publication Frontiers of Freedom in their February 23, 2016 issue documented what has been done in an article by T. Richard titled “How NOAA Rewrote Climate Data to Hide Global Warming Pause”.http://httpe://.
The falsification of climate data by NOAA and NASA covers more than just the past decade. The U.S. has published temperature data beginning in 1880 up to the present. Tony Heller shows how their data has been tinkered with many times in past years, in The History of NASA/NOAA Temperature Corruption posted at.
The graph of the NASA data from 1880 to the year 2000 (below) was posted in 1999. On the same chart is the data NASA posted for the very same years in 2016. This obvious alteration of reality should be an embarrassment to NASA, but appears not to be.
Representative Lamar Smith former chair of the House of Representatives Science and Technology Committee demanded that NOAA and NASA produce their data for independent analysis. NOAA refused to release the subpoenaed documents. Judicial Watch has sued NOAA under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain access to their data. So far nothing has been turned over.
The climate curve recalculated in 2016 is now in complete agreement with the global warming movement. The cooling trend between 1940 and 1970 has been eliminated. The data now show that temperatures are increasing along with our rising carbon dioxide. The new curve shows the Earth’s temperature increased 1.4 degrees C since 1880. Temperatures that are out of line with the prediction of alarmists are gradually and systematically adjusted and replaced by corrected computer-generated temperatures. Children who are fed this new data are being recruited to beg us to save their futures.
The truth seeping out from NASA was first reported in the New American magazine by James Murphy in October of 2018 where he quoted Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center saying “High above Earths’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold” Major media outlets completely ignored this information.
This new revelation comes from NASA’s SABER instrument aboard NASA’s TIMED satellite. In plain talk SABER stands for Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry and TIMED stands for the Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics.
SABER monitors infrared radiation from carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide which are two of the gases that play a major role in releasing energy from the thermosphere at the top of our atmosphere which encapsulates our planets heat. Mlynczak, who is the associate principal investigator for SABER said “the thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimums. It’s one of the most important ways the solar cycle effects our planet”.Solar Minimums as the words would indicate are periods of less activity spawning a decrease in radiation launched toward the Earth.
While pondering this surprise comment from NASA in a January 30, 2019 post, author Michael Sherlock said “all any of this proves is that we have at best, a cursory understanding of Earth’s incredibly complex climate system. So when mainstream media and carbon credit salesman Al Gore breathlessly warn you that we must do something about climate change, it’s alright to step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we don’t have the knowledge, skill or resources to have much effect on the Earth’s climate.”
Jay Lehr is the author of more than 1,000 magazine and journal articles and 36 books. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government, as well as many foreign countries. He is a leading authority on groundwater hydrology.
How do those who see no climate problem account for the fact that the last 50 years has seen global land surface temperature rise faster than at any previously recorded time in the planet’s history?
Paul Noel, former Research Scientist 6 Level 2 UAH Huntsville Al. (2009-2014)
Answered 22h ago
It works this way. You establish a weather station sensor set to take care of an airport in 1910. The airport is a grass strip way out in the country. Times change the airport gets paved then the parking areas grow. Then industry grows. Finally your sensors are outside a building surrounded by paved areas and right next to an AC unit. If you cannot figure this out you are lost.
This is called a site error. All weather sets relocated to proper locations have all shown NO temperature rise. If anything they show declines.
Or maybe you didn’t know that almost all weather stations are associated with airports?
954 views · View Upvoters · View Sharers · Answer requested by Vaughan Pratt
TL Winslow, Ross Firestone, Dee Francis Padamadan, and Richard Dress upvoted this
22h ago · 3 upvotes
I know of a larger site error than airports:: a weather station next to a power sub-station with air cooled transformers. When the electricity demand is high on a hot summer’s day, the cooling fans blow hot air directly on the temperature sensor producing Phoenix-high temperatures.
21h ago · 4 upvotes
Your claim about rate of change is , well, scientific bullshit. Here are the interglacial periods in the mere 450,000 years ago to now. Historically, we should be about 2°C hotter.
No warming in the mid-Atlantic states since 1800, and no climate disaster pending.