Global temperature records run hot and cold

By |2015-10-19T13:46:56+00:00October 19th, 2015|CFACT Insights|14 Comments

noRatlYes, global climate constantly changes . . . with contrasting short-term regional warming and cooling episodes invariably occurring simultaneously. Such developments happen for lots of reasons, all of which likely have nothing do with CO2 emissions.

A September 24 Washington Post article authored by Chris Mooney headlines: “Why some scientists are worried about a surprisingly cold ‘blob’ in the North Atlantic Ocean.”

While clearly a weather episode rather than a minimum three-decade-long climate trend, this has purportedly happened when “the first eight months of 2015 were the hottest stretch yet recorded for the globe’s surface land and oceans based upon temperature records going back to 1880.”

Mooney also notes that in the North Atlantic Ocean south of Greenland and Iceland, “the ocean surface has seen very cold temperatures in the past eight months.” In fact, North Atlantic Ocean temperatures between January and August were reportedly “the coldest on record” over the past 80 years.

And just why are “some scientists” supposedly worried about this? Yup, it’s because they attribute cause for alarm, as always, to global warming.

Here Mooney goes to Michael Mann, famous for his discredited Earth-on-fire-and-we’re-causing-it “hockey stick” graph for the DENMARKbeachanswer. In a paper Mann published along with co-author Stefan Rahmstorf in Nature Climate Change, the cause for fear is that the Atlantic Ocean circulation is weakening due to a release of fresh water melting in Greenland, which can “mess it all up.”

By the way, according to the Danish Meteorological Institute, the number of year-to-year Arctic days with mean temperatures above freezing has changed very little over the past 55 years, except for 2013 which had only half the long-term mean of 90 days.

Their data, indicating a stable northern climate, also challenge claims of warming-induced thinning of sea ice extent over recent decades. And although annual sea ice buildup is influenced mostly by wind, as with temperatures, the annual and more seasonal changes have remained quite constant as well.

Incidentally, even the UN’s alarmist Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been forced to concede that 111 of its 114 climate models have grossly overpredicted the global warming rate in recent decades. Their latest 2013 “Fifth Assessment Report” shows a considerable reduction in near-term doom prognostications.

On top of inescapable measurement uncertainties, surface ocean and land temperature records have been tweaked many times, invariably to suggest more recent warming than previously trumpeted.buoys

The latest adjustments by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) inflate superior measurements taken by fixed or floating buoys by adding in earlier and far more haphazard measurements taken from ships.

Even relatively crude and sparsely located modern thermometers didn’t exist until the last hundred years, while satellite measurements which comprehensively cover vastly more area and are much more accurate have only existed since 1979. Still, those satellites indicate that global temperatures have been statistically flat since 1998, a major El Niño year.

A new and again entirely natural El Niño is shaping up to raise sea surface temperatures across the eastern half of the tropical Pacific.

The National Weather Service reports that all of its models predict the rise to gain strength, with normal wind patterns interrupted by “enhanced convection over the central and eastern equatorial Pacific that could cause a full reversal of the weather pattern and torrential rains to the West Coast.”

The NWS further predicts a 95% probability that this latest El Niño will continue through the Northern Hemisphere during the winter of 2015-2016, then gradually weaken in spring of 2016.

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology reports that although tropical Pacific temperature anomalies, the variance to average temperatures in elninoEl Ninotral Pacific, are currently at their highest values since 1997-98, they still remain more than half of a degree below that previous peak. So far, 2015 is actually following a normal El Niño life cycle.

So, finally, is 2015 really going to turn out to be the hottest year ever? According to Joseph D’Aleo, an elected fellow of the American Meteorological Society and the first director of meteorology at The Weather Channel, not even close.

He told me that recent months are “in the middle of the pack for the last 20 years of satellite and NOAA raw data that goes into the models . . . not skyrocketing to the Mooney.”

As Principal Research Scientist Roy Spencer, a meteorologist at the University of Alabama-Huntsville, observes: “The [surface] thermometer network is made up of a patchwork of non-research-quality instruments that were never made to monitor long-term temperature changes to tenths or hundredths of a degree, and the huge data voids around the world are either ignored or infilled with fictitious data.”

Dr. Spencer notes British economist Ronald Coase once saying; “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything.” Likewise, hasn’t climate science suffered enough?

This article was first posted at:


  1. Brin Jenkins October 24, 2015 at 7:46 AM

    I would like to see these deceivers held responsible for the economic damage caused by their predictions.

    • Dano2 October 24, 2015 at 5:55 PM

      You are unable to show any economic damage caused by their predictions.

      None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Bupkis.



      • Brin Jenkins October 26, 2015 at 2:08 AM

        Of course we see economic damage. More taxes to pay the to Third World in Carbon Credits. We have seen the cost of energy triple in the UK causing manufactures to relocate to where these taxes are not levied. South Africa, China, India have all refused to pledge a reduction in CO2, some have said they will hold own increases to 2006 levels perhaps or in one instance I read double what they currently produce now. Far from reducing CO2 this will by your own predictions increase it as they further industrialise. Germany tied to scrapping Nuclear Energy invested in green energy. As its realised they will not balance the load they are rushing into building coal fired generators pdq.

        This of course will contribute little to climate in any case, but it is shifting our jobs to the under developed Nations. Just the ticket for Globalisation aka the teachings of Karl Marx. Instead of trying to shut up carbon realists perhaps the ones causing real economic damage need holding to account. You are a prime example by trying to bully folk into destroying their lived by your lying.

        • Dano2 October 26, 2015 at 3:25 AM

          South Africa, China, India have all refused to pledge a reduction in CO2

          We love your dispatches from an alternate universe.



          • Brin Jenkins October 26, 2015 at 9:34 AM

            idiot again.

            • Dano2 October 26, 2015 at 12:16 PM

              Ignorance again.



            • cshorey November 6, 2015 at 2:54 PM

              Stop calling yourself names Brin.

  2. Dano2 October 24, 2015 at 8:13 AM

    Poor Larry had a hard job – try to wave his hands to make the warming go away.



    • Brin Jenkins October 24, 2015 at 1:57 PM

      Big deal, took at the scale of the graph . One degree, and when was the data corrected to equalise?

      Probably like ships water temperatures were found to be .5 deg warmer than the boys so it was all adjusted upwards. Get real and stop trying to panic folks with hockey stick fraud. We have several long term cycles, not short term cherry picking trends.

      Why not explain clearly exactly how it all works without asking us to take it on faith?

      • Dano2 October 24, 2015 at 5:54 PM

        Can’t grasp it, got it.

        Why not explain clearly exactly how it all works without asking us to take it on faith?

        Why keep asking when you’ve already been told?



        • Brin Jenkins October 26, 2015 at 2:19 AM

          You lie again Duno, you have always refused to explain any detail because you know the detail will be argued. Your cabal rely on bamboozling like a snake oil specialists. Get down to the mechanism or stop arguing as though you understand when you clearly do not.

          • Dano2 October 26, 2015 at 3:24 AM

            you have always refused to explain any detail because you know the detail will be argued

            Dishonest assertion.



      • cshorey November 6, 2015 at 2:52 PM

        And that’s why the BEST team found the same record as NOAA and NASA and pointed out that even if absolute systematic errors happen, the trends can still be seen. Brin has nothing, but that’s not new.

  3. John Swallow May 31, 2017 at 7:37 AM

    “Farmers’ Almanac More Reliable Than Warming Climate Models”
    “Bad Science: It turns out that a 200-year-old publication for farmers beats climate-change scientists in predicting this year’s harsh winter as the lowly caterpillar beats supercomputers that can’t even predict the past.
    Last fall, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Prediction Center (CPC) predicted above-normal temperatures from November through January across much of the continental U.S. The Farmers’ Almanac, first published in 1818, predicted a bitterly cold, snowy winter.
    The Maine-based Farmers’ Almanac’s still-secret methodology includes variables such as planetary positions, sunspots, lunar cycles and tidal action. It claims an 80% accuracy rate, surely better than those who obsess over fossil fuels and CO2.
    The winter has stayed cold in 2014, and snowfall and snow cover are way above average. USA Today reported on Feb. 14 that there was snow on the ground in part of every state except Florida. That includes Hawaii.

    Are climate change models becoming more accurate and less reliable?

Comments are closed.