With no climate crisis, the justification for trillions of dollars in government spending and costly changes in public policy to restrict carbon dioxide emissions collapses
The fear of anthropogenic global warming has generated a great interest in temperature trends such that even minute changes in the temperature record are scrutinized.
This points to the central role that temperatures play in terrifying populations to accept the appalling lifestyle changes needed to achieve Net Zero in less than 30 years.
Temperature records used by climate scientists and governments to build models that then forecast dangerous man-made global warming repercussions have serious problems and even corruption in the data
Problems with temperature data include a lack of geographically and historically representative data, contamination of the records by heat from urban areas, and corruption of the data introduced by a process known as 'homogenization.' The flaws are so significant that they make the temperature data, and the media based on it, essentially useless or worse. (1)
Scientific experts from around the world in various fields are pushing back. In peer reviewed studies, they cite a wide range of flaws with the global temperature data used to reach dire conclusions. They say it's time to reexamine the whole narrative.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) climate monitoring stations found that Earth's average land and ocean surface temperature in 2023 was 1.35 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial average. But a growing chorus of climate scientists are saying the temperature readings are faulty and that trillions of dollars pouring in are based on a problem that doesn't exist. (2)
Meteorologist Anthony Watts reports that 96 percent of NOAA temperature stations are located in urban heat islands, next to exhaust fans and on blistering rooftops. Watts says, “We found stations located next to exhaust fans or air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering hot rooftops.” (3)
The few stations that are left that are not biased because they are, for example, outside of town in a field and are an agricultural research station that's been around for 100 years. Their data gets completely swamped by the much larger set of biased data. There's no way you can adjust that out says Watts.
Roy Spencer agreed and added, “The surface thermometer data still have spurious warming effects due to the urban heat island which increases over time.” He also said, “Climate models used to drive changes in energy policy are even more faulty.” (2)
Spencer adds, “Warming of the global climate system over the past century has averaged 43 percent less than that produced by computerized climate models used to promote changes in energy policy. Contrary to media reports and environmental organizations' press releases, global warming offers no justification for carbon based regulation.”
Lt. Col. John Shewchuk, a certified consulting meteorologist, said the problems with temperature readings go beyond heat bias.”After seeing many reports about NOAA's adjustments to historical temperature data, I decided to download and analyze the data myself. I was able to confirm what others have found. It is obvious that overall, the past temperatures were cooled while the present temperatures were warmed.”
He contends that NOAA and NASA have adjusted historical temperature data in such a way as to make the past appear colder and by so doing, make the current warming trend more pronounced.(2)
NOAA fabricates temperature data for more than 30 percent of the 1,218 United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) reporting stations that no longer exist. They are physically gone, but still report data, like magic.
NOAA still records data from these ghost stations by taking the temperature readings from surrounding stations, and recording their average for the ghost station, followed by an 'E' for estimate. The addition of the ghost's station data means NOAA's monthly and yearly reports are not representative of reality. (4)
NASA released a report showing strong surface warming (equal to or greater than 4 C) in the Antarctic Circle compared to the 1951-1980 average. Where were the thermometers, inside the Antarctic Circle in 1951? They weren't there. The failure of these government organizations to report that large sections of the globe had no systematic temperature measurements in 1951 is atrocious. Antarctica is probably the worst example. For NASA and other government organizations to show a dramatic warming of 4C where there is no systematic record is absurd. (5)
Another example are massive retrospective alterations that have been made to surface air temperatures by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), on the main global databases run by the US space agency NASA.
Professor Ole Humlum has discovered that in the period January 1915 to January 2000, GISS changed past warming from 0.45C to 0,67C. This was a massive increase of 49 percent, which means that almost half of the apparent warming in most of the 20th century was due to administrative changes made years after the initial measurements. On such data is the need for a global Net Zero being promoted. (6)
Nearly eight out of ten Met Office measuring stations across the United Kingdom were sited in near junk class 4 and junk class 5. The latter class comes with prescribed uncertainties up to 5C. Class 1 sites number just 24 and make up only 6.3 percent of the total. (7)
With no climate crisis, the justification for trillions of dollars in government spending and costly changes in public policy to restrict carbon dioxide emissions collapses.
Data taken from rural temperature stations, ocean measurements, weather balloons, satellite measurements, and temperature proxies such as tree rings, glaciers and lake sediments, show that the climate has always changed. (1)
Read next: Question Suspect and Faulty Temperature Data
Email Us | Reader Friendly | Comments
