2013 Will Finish One Of The Ten Coldest Years In US History, With The Largest Drop In Temperature

Before NASA and NOAA start tampering with the data, 2013 is one of the ten coldest years  in the US since 1895, and has had the largest year over year decline on record.

NOAA of course won’t talk about this, and will massively tamper with the data before releasing it.

The graph below is the monthly average of all daily high and low temperatures at all NOAA USHCN stations.

ScreenHunter_437 Dec. 19 17.16 ScreenHunter_439 Dec. 19 17.20

Thermometer data is here : Index of /pub/data/ghcn/daily/hcn/

December isn’t complete yet, but is running far below normal and forecast to get colder.

MonthTDeptUS

MonthTDeptUS.png (688×531)

NOAA will reporting something very different, because they subtract up to 1.7 degrees from older temperatures. Essentially all reported US warming is due to a hockey stick of temperature adjustments, which makes the past appear to be much colder than what the thermometers measured at the time. (They of course do not mention this in their press releases.)

ScreenHunter_461 Dec. 20 10.44

Complete station list can be seen below

BREWTON 3 SSE                      	AL	USC00011084
FAIRHOPE 2 NE                      	AL	USC00012813
GAINESVILLE LOCK                   	AL	USC00013160
GREENSBORO                         	AL	USC00013511
HIGHLAND HOME                      	AL	USC00013816
SAINT BERNARD                      	AL	USC00017157
SCOTTSBORO                         	AL	USC00017304
SELMA                              	AL	USC00017366
TALLADEGA                          	AL	USC00018024
THOMASVILLE                        	AL	USC00018178
TROY                               	AL	USC00018323
UNION SPRINGS 9 S                  	AL	USC00018438
VALLEY HEAD                        	AL	USC00018469
AJO                                	AZ	USC00020080
BUCKEYE                            	AZ	USC00021026
CANYON DE CHELLY                   	AZ	USC00021248
CHANDLER HEIGHTS                   	AZ	USC00021514
CHILDS                             	AZ	USC00021614
FT VALLEY                          	AZ	USC00023160
GRAND CANYON NP 2                  	AZ	USC00023596
HOLBROOK                           	AZ	USC00024089
KINGMAN #2                         	AZ	USC00024645
LEES FERRY                         	AZ	USC00024849
MIAMI                              	AZ	USC00025512
PARKER                             	AZ	USC00026250
PEARCE - SUNSITES                  	AZ	USC00026353
PRESCOTT                           	AZ	USC00026796
ROOSEVELT 1 WNW                    	AZ	USC00027281
SACATON                            	AZ	USC00027370
SAFFORD AGRICULTRL CTR             	AZ	USC00027390
SAINT JOHNS                        	AZ	USC00027435
SELIGMAN                           	AZ	USC00027716
TOMBSTONE                          	AZ	USC00028619
TUCSON WFO                         	AZ	USC00028815
WHITERIVER 1 SW                    	AZ	USC00029271
WICKENBURG                         	AZ	USC00029287
WILLIAMS                           	AZ	USC00029359
YUMA CITRUS STN                    	AZ	USC00029652
BRINKLEY                           	AR	USC00030936
CONWAY                             	AR	USC00031596
CORNING                            	AR	USC00031632
EUREKA SPRINGS 3 WNW               	AR	USC00032356
FAYETTEVILLE EXP STN               	AR	USC00032444
GRAVETTE                           	AR	USC00032930
MAMMOTH SPRING                     	AR	USC00034572
MENA                               	AR	USC00034756
NEWPORT                            	AR	USC00035186
OZARK 2                            	AR	USC00035512
PINE BLUFF                         	AR	USC00035754
POCAHONTAS 1                       	AR	USC00035820
PRESCOTT 2 NNW                     	AR	USC00035908
ROHWER 2 NNE                       	AR	USC00036253
SUBIACO                            	AR	USC00036928
BERKELEY                           	CA	USC00040693
BLYTHE                             	CA	USC00040924
BRAWLEY 2 SW                       	CA	USC00041048
CEDARVILLE                         	CA	USC00041614
CHICO UNIV FARM                    	CA	USC00041715
CHULA VISTA                        	CA	USC00041758
COLFAX                             	CA	USC00041912
CUYAMACA                           	CA	USC00042239
DAVIS 2 WSW EXP FARM               	CA	USC00042294
DEATH VALLEY                       	CA	USC00042319
ELECTRA P H                        	CA	USC00042728
FAIRMONT                           	CA	USC00042941
FT BRAGG 5 N                       	CA	USC00043161
HANFORD 1 S                        	CA	USC00043747
HAPPY CAMP RS                      	CA	USC00043761
HEALDSBURG                         	CA	USC00043875
INDEPENDENCE                       	CA	USC00044232
INDIO FIRE STN                     	CA	USC00044259
LAKE SPAULDING                     	CA	USC00044713
LEMON COVE                         	CA	USC00044890
LIVERMORE                          	CA	USC00044997
LODI                               	CA	USC00045032
MARYSVILLE                         	CA	USC00045385
MERCED                             	CA	USC00045532
		USC00045983
NAPA STATE HOSPITAL                	CA	USC00046074
NEWPORT BEACH HARBOR               	CA	USC00046175
OJAI                               	CA	USC00046399
ORLAND                             	CA	USC00046506
ORLEANS                            	CA	USC00046508
PASADENA                           	CA	USC00046719
PASO ROBLES                        	CA	USC00046730
PETALUMA AIRPORT                   	CA	USC00046826
QUINCY                             	CA	USC00047195
REDLANDS                           	CA	USC00047306
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLY U             	CA	USC00047851
SANTA BARBARA                      	CA	USC00047902
SANTA CRUZ                         	CA	USC00047916
SANTA ROSA                         	CA	USC00047965
SUSANVILLE 2SW                     	CA	USC00048702
TAHOE CITY                         	CA	USC00048758
TEJON RANCHO                       	CA	USC00048839
TUSTIN IRVINE RCH                  	CA	USC00049087
UKIAH                              	CA	USC00049122
VACAVILLE                          	CA	USC00049200
WASCO                              	CA	USC00049452
WEAVERVILLE                        	CA	USC00049490
WILLOWS 6 W                        	CA	USC00049699
YOSEMITE PARK HQ                   	CA	USC00049855
YREKA                              	CA	USC00049866
BOULDER                            	CO	USC00050848
CANON CITY                         	CO	USC00051294
CHEESMAN                           	CO	USC00051528
CHEYENNE WELLS                     	CO	USC00051564
COLLBRAN                           	CO	USC00051741
DEL NORTE 2E                       	CO	USC00052184
DILLON 1 E                         	CO	USC00052281
EADS                               	CO	USC00052446
FT COLLINS                         	CO	USC00053005
FT MORGAN                          	CO	USC00053038
FRUITA                             	CO	USC00053146
GUNNISON 3SW                       	CO	USC00053662
HERMIT 7 ESE                       	CO	USC00053951
HOLLY                              	CO	USC00054076
LAMAR                              	CO	USC00054770
LAS ANIMAS                         	CO	USC00054834
MANASSA                            	CO	USC00055322
MONTROSE #2                        	CO	USC00055722
ROCKY FORD 2 SE                    	CO	USC00057167
SAGUACHE                           	CO	USC00057337
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS                  	CO	USC00057936
TELLURIDE 4WNW                     	CO	USC00058204
TRINIDAD                           	CO	USC00058429
WRAY                               	CO	USC00059243
FALLS VILLAGE                      	CT	USC00062658
GROTON                             	CT	USC00063207
STAMFORD 5 N                       	CT	USC00067970
STORRS                             	CT	USC00068138
DOVER                              	DE	USC00072730
GREENWOOD 2NE                      	DE	USC00073595
MILFORD 2 SE                       	DE	USC00075915
NEWARK UNIV FARM                   	DE	USC00076410
WILMINGTON PORTER RES              	DE	USC00079605
		USC00080211
ARCADIA                            	FL	USC00080228
BARTOW                             	FL	USC00080478
BELLE GLADE                        	FL	USC00080611
DE FUNIAK SPRINGS 1 E              	FL	USC00082220
EVERGLADES                         	FL	USC00082850
FEDERAL POINT                      	FL	USC00082915
FERNANDINA BEACH                   	FL	USC00082944
FT LAUDERDALE                      	FL	USC00083163
FT PIERCE                          	FL	USC00083207
INVERNESS 3 SE                     	FL	USC00084289
LAKE CITY 2 E                      	FL	USC00084731
MADISON                            	FL	USC00085275
OCALA                              	FL	USC00086414
PERRINE 4W                         	FL	USC00087020
SAINT LEO                          	FL	USC00087851
TARPON SPGS SEWAGE PL              	FL	USC00088824
TITUSVILLE                         	FL	USC00088942
ALBANY 3 SE                        	GA	USC00090140
BAINBRIDGE INTL PAPER              	GA	USC00090586
BRUNSWICK                          	GA	USC00091340
CAMILLA 3SE                        	GA	USC00091500
COVINGTON                          	GA	USC00092318
DAHLONEGA                          	GA	USC00092475
EASTMAN 1 W                        	GA	USC00092966
GAINESVILLE                        	GA	USC00093621
GLENNVILLE 3NW                     	GA	USC00093754
HAWKINSVILLE                       	GA	USC00094170
MILLEDGEVILLE                      	GA	USC00095874
MILLEN 4 N                         	GA	USC00095882
NEWNAN 5N                          	GA	USC00096335
QUITMAN 2 NW                       	GA	USC00097276
ROME                               	GA	USC00097600
TALBOTTON                          	GA	USC00098535
TIFTON                             	GA	USC00098703
TOCCOA                             	GA	USC00098740
WARRENTON                          	GA	USC00099141
WASHINGTON 2 ESE                   	GA	USC00099157
WAYCROSS 4 NE                      	GA	USC00099186
WEST POINT                         	GA	USC00099291
ABERDEEN EXP STN                   	ID	USC00100010
ARROWROCK DAM                      	ID	USC00100448
ASHTON 1N                          	ID	USC00100470
BERN                               	ID	USC00100803
CAMBRIDGE                          	ID	USC00101408
COEUR D'ALENE                      	ID	USC00101956
DWORSHAK FISH HATCH                	ID	USC00102845
FENN RS                            	ID	USC00103143
GLENNS FERRY                       	ID	USC00103631
GRACE                              	ID	USC00103732
HAZELTON                           	ID	USC00104140
HOLLISTER                          	ID	USC00104295
JEROME                             	ID	USC00104670
KELLOGG                            	ID	USC00104831
KETCHUM RS                         	ID	USC00104845
LIFTON PUMPING STN                 	ID	USC00105275
MACKAY LOST RIVER RS               	ID	USC00105462
MAY 2SSE                           	ID	USC00105685
MOSCOW U OF I                      	ID	USC00106152
NAMPA SUGAR FACTORY                	ID	USC00106305
NEW MEADOWS RS                     	ID	USC00106388
OAKLEY                             	ID	USC00106542
PAYETTE                            	ID	USC00106891
PORTHILL                           	ID	USC00107264
PRIEST RIVER EXP STN               	ID	USC00107386
SALMON-KSRA                        	ID	USC00108080
SANDPOINT EXP STN                  	ID	USC00108137
ALEDO                              	IL	USC00110072
ANNA 2 NNE                         	IL	USC00110187
AURORA                             	IL	USC00110338
CARLINVILLE                        	IL	USC00111280
CHARLESTON                         	IL	USC00111436
DANVILLE                           	IL	USC00112140
DECATUR WTP                        	IL	USC00112193
DIXON 1 NW                         	IL	USC00112348
DU QUOIN 4 SE                      	IL	USC00112483
GALVA                              	IL	USC00113335
HARRISBURG                         	IL	USC00113879
HILLSBORO                          	IL	USC00114108
HOOPESTON                          	IL	USC00114198
JACKSONVILLE 2E                    	IL	USC00114442
LA HARPE                           	IL	USC00114823
LINCOLN                            	IL	USC00115079
MARENGO                            	IL	USC00115326
MCLEANSBORO                        	IL	USC00115515
MINONK                             	IL	USC00115712
MONMOUTH                           	IL	USC00115768
MORRISON                           	IL	USC00115833
MT CARROLL                         	IL	USC00115901
MT VERNON 3 NE                     	IL	USC00115943
OLNEY 2S                           	IL	USC00116446
OTTAWA 5SW                         	IL	USC00116526
PALESTINE                          	IL	USC00116558
PANA                               	IL	USC00116579
PARIS STP                          	IL	USC00116610
PERRY 6 NW                         	IL	USC00116738
PONTIAC                            	IL	USC00116910
RUSHVILLE 4NE                      	IL	USC00117551
SPARTA 1 W                         	IL	USC00118147
URBANA                             	IL	USC00118740
WALNUT                             	IL	USC00118916
WHITE HALL 1 E                     	IL	USC00119241
WINDSOR                            	IL	USC00119354
ANDERSON SEWAGE PLT                	IN	USC00120177
ANGOLA                             	IN	USC00120200
BERNE WWTP                         	IN	USC00120676
BLOOMINGTON IN UNIV                	IN	USC00120784
BROOKVILLE                         	IN	USC00121030
CAMBRIDGE CITY 3 N                 	IN	USC00121229
CHARLESTOWN 5 NNW                  	IN	USC00121425
COLUMBUS                           	IN	USC00121747
CRAWFORDSVILLE 6 SE                	IN	USC00121873
DELPHI 2 N                         	IN	USC00122149
GOSHEN 3SW                         	IN	USC00123418
GREENCASTLE 1 W                    	IN	USC00123513
GREENFIELD                         	IN	USC00123527
HOBART 2 WNW                       	IN	USC00124008
HUNTINGTON                         	IN	USC00124181
LAPORTE                            	IN	USC00124837
MADISON SEWAGE PLT                 	IN	USC00125237
MARION 2 N                         	IN	USC00125337
MT VERNON                          	IN	USC00126001
OOLITIC PURDUE EX FRM              	IN	USC00126580
PAOLI                              	IN	USC00126705
PRINCETON 1 W                      	IN	USC00127125
RENSSELAER                         	IN	USC00127298
ROCHESTER                          	IN	USC00127482
ROCKVILLE                          	IN	USC00127522
RUSHVILLE                          	IN	USC00127646
SALEM                              	IN	USC00127755
SCOTTSBURG                         	IN	USC00127875
SEYMOUR 2 N                        	IN	USC00127935
SHOALS 8 S                         	IN	USC00128036
VEVAY                              	IN	USC00129080
VINCENNES 5 NE                     	IN	USC00129113
WASHINGTON 1 W                     	IN	USC00129253
WHEATFIELD                         	IN	USC00129511
WHITESTOWN                         	IN	USC00129557
WINAMAC 2SSE                       	IN	USC00129670
ALBIA 3 NNE                        	IA	USC00130112
ALGONA 3 W                         	IA	USC00130133
BELLE PLAINE                       	IA	USC00130600
CHARLES CITY                       	IA	USC00131402
CLARINDA                           	IA	USC00131533
CLINTON #1                         	IA	USC00131635
ESTHERVILLE 4E                     	IA	USC00132724
FAIRFIELD                          	IA	USC00132789
FAYETTE                            	IA	USC00132864
FOREST CITY 2 NNE                  	IA	USC00132977
FT DODGE 5NNW                      	IA	USC00132999
INDIANOLA 2W                       	IA	USC00134063
IOWA FALLS                         	IA	USC00134142
LE MARS                            	IA	USC00134735
LOGAN                              	IA	USC00134894
MT AYR                             	IA	USC00135769
MT PLEASANT 1 SSW                  	IA	USC00135796
NEW HAMPTON                        	IA	USC00135952
ROCK RAPIDS                        	IA	USC00137147
ROCKWELL CITY                      	IA	USC00137161
STORM LAKE 2 E                     	IA	USC00137979
TOLEDO 3N                          	IA	USC00138296
WASHINGTON                         	IA	USC00138688
ASHLAND                            	KS	USC00140365
ATCHISON                           	KS	USC00140405
COLDWATER                          	KS	USC00141704
COLUMBUS                           	KS	USC00141740
COUNCIL GROVE LAKE                 	KS	USC00141867
EL DORADO                          	KS	USC00142401
ELLSWORTH                          	KS	USC00142459
FT SCOTT                           	KS	USC00142835
HAYS 1 S                           	KS	USC00143527
HORTON                             	KS	USC00143810
INDEPENDENCE                       	KS	USC00143954
JETMORE 8NNW                       	KS	USC00144087
LAKIN                              	KS	USC00144464
LARNED                             	KS	USC00144530
LAWRENCE                           	KS	USC00144559
LEAVENWORTH                        	KS	USC00144588
LIBERAL                            	KS	USC00144695
MANHATTAN                          	KS	USC00144972
MCPHERSON                          	KS	USC00145152
MEDICINE LODGE                     	KS	USC00145173
MINNEAPOLIS                        	KS	USC00145363
NORTON 9SSE                        	KS	USC00145856
OBERLIN                            	KS	USC00145906
OLATHE 3E                          	KS	USC00145972
OTTAWA                             	KS	USC00146128
SAINT FRANCIS                      	KS	USC00147093
SCOTT CITY                         	KS	USC00147271
SEDAN                              	KS	USC00147305
SMITH CTR                          	KS	USC00147542
WAKEENEY                           	KS	USC00148495
ASHLAND                            	KY	USC00150254
BARBOURVILLE                       	KY	USC00150381
BEREA COLLEGE                      	KY	USC00150619
CAVE RUN  LAKE                     	KY	USC00152791
FRANKFORT DOWNTOWN                 	KY	USC00153028
GREENSBURG                         	KY	USC00153430
HENDERSON 8 SSW                    	KY	USC00153762
HOPKINSVILLE                       	KY	USC00153994
LEITCHFIELD 2 N                    	KY	USC00154703
SHELBYVILLE 1 E                    	KY	USC00157324
WILLIAMSBURG                       	KY	USC00158709
WILLIAMSTOWN 3 W                   	KY	USC00158714
ALEXANDRIA                         	LA	USC00160098
AMITE                              	LA	USC00160205
BASTROP                            	LA	USC00160537
BUNKIE                             	LA	USC00161287
CALHOUN RSCH STN                   	LA	USC00161411
COVINGTON 4 NNW                    	LA	USC00162151
DONALDSONVILLE 4 SW                	LA	USC00162534
FRANKLIN 3 NW                      	LA	USC00163313
GRAND COTEAU                       	LA	USC00163800
HOUMA                              	LA	USC00164407
JENNINGS                           	LA	USC00164700
PLAIN DEALING 4 W                  	LA	USC00167344
ST JOSEPH 3 N                      	LA	USC00168163
THIBODAUX 4 SE                     	LA	USC00169013
WINNSBORO 5 SSE                    	LA	USC00169806
ACADIA NP                          	ME	USC00170100
BRASSUA DAM                        	ME	USC00170814
CORINNA                            	ME	USC00171628
EASTPORT                           	ME	USC00172426
FARMINGTON                         	ME	USC00172765
GARDINER                           	ME	USC00173046
HOULTON 5N                         	ME	USC00173944
LEWISTON                           	ME	USC00174566
MILLINOCKET                        	ME	USC00175304
PRESQUE ISLE                       	ME	USC00176937
WOODLAND                           	ME	USC00179891
BELTSVILLE                         	MD	USC00180700
CAMBRIDGE WATER TRMT P             	MD	USC00181385
CHESTERTOWN                        	MD	USC00181750
CUMBERLAND 2                       	MD	USC00182282
DENTON 2 E                         	MD	USC00182523
GLENN DALE BELL STN                	MD	USC00183675
LAUREL 3 W                         	MD	USC00185111
MILLINGTON 1 SE                    	MD	USC00185985
OAKLAND 1 SE                       	MD	USC00186620
OWINGS FERRY LANDING               	MD	USC00186770
PRINCESS ANNE                      	MD	USC00187330
ROYAL OAK 2 SSW                    	MD	USC00187806
SALISBURY                          	MD	USC00188000
WESTMINSTER                        	MD	USC00189440
WOODSTOCK                          	MD	USC00189750
AMHERST                            	MA	USC00190120
BEDFORD                            	MA	USC00190535
		USC00190736
GREAT BARRINGTON 2N                	MA	USC00193213
LAWRENCE                           	MA	USC00194105
NEW BEDFORD                        	MA	USC00195246
PLYMOUTH-KINGSTON                  	MA	USC00196486
PROVINCETOWN                       	MA	USC00196681
READING                            	MA	USC00196783
TAUNTON                            	MA	USC00198367
WALPOLE 2                          	MA	USC00198757
WEST MEDWAY                        	MA	USC00199316
ADRIAN 2 NNE                       	MI	USC00200032
ALLEGAN 5NE                        	MI	USC00200128
ALMA                               	MI	USC00200146
ANN ARBOR U OF MICH                	MI	USC00200230
BIG RAPIDS WTR WKS                 	MI	USC00200779
CHAMPION VAN RIPER PK              	MI	USC00201439
CHATHAM EXP FARM 2                 	MI	USC00201486
CHEBOYGAN                          	MI	USC00201492
COLDWATER ST SCHOOL                	MI	USC00201675
EAST TAWAS                         	MI	USC00202423
FAYETTE 4 SW                       	MI	USC00202737
HART 3 WSW                         	MI	USC00203632
HILLSDALE                          	MI	USC00203823
IRON MT KINGSFORD WWTP             	MI	USC00204090
IRONWOOD                           	MI	USC00204104
KALAMAZOO STATE HOSPITAL           	MI	USC00204244
MIDLAND                            	MI	USC00205434
MT PLEASANT UNIV                   	MI	USC00205662
MUNISING                           	MI	USC00205690
NEWBERRY 3S                        	MI	USC00205816
OWOSSO WWTP                        	MI	USC00206300
SOUTH HAVEN                        	MI	USC00207690
STAMBAUGH 2SSE                     	MI	USC00207812
ADA                                	MN	USC00210018
ALBERT LEA 3 SE                    	MN	USC00210075
ARGYLE                             	MN	USC00210252
BAUDETTE                           	MN	USC00210515
CHASKA                             	MN	USC00211465
CLOQUET                            	MN	USC00211630
DETROIT LAKES 1 NNE                	MN	USC00212142
EVELETH WWTP                       	MN	USC00212645
FAIRMONT                           	MN	USC00212698
FARMINGTON 3 NW                    	MN	USC00212737
FOSSTON 1 E                        	MN	USC00212916
GRAND MEADOW                       	MN	USC00213290
GRAND RPDS FOREST LAB              	MN	USC00213303
ITASCA UNIV OF MINN                	MN	USC00214106
LEECH LAKE                         	MN	USC00214652
MARCELL 5NE                        	MN	USC00215175
MILAN 1 NW                         	MN	USC00215400
MONTEVIDEO 1 SW                    	MN	USC00215563
MORA                               	MN	USC00215615
MORRIS WC EXP STN                  	MN	USC00215638
NEW ULM 2 SE                       	MN	USC00215887
OLIVIA 3E                          	MN	USC00216152
PINE RIVER DAM                     	MN	USC00216547
PIPESTONE                          	MN	USC00216565
ROSEAU                             	MN	USC00217087
ST PETER                           	MN	USC00217405
SANDY LAKE DAM LIBBY               	MN	USC00217460
TWO HARBORS                        	MN	USC00218419
WALKER AH GWAH CHING               	MN	USC00218618
WINNEBAGO                          	MN	USC00219046
ZUMBROTA                           	MN	USC00219249
ABERDEEN                           	MS	USC00220021
BATESVILLE 2 SW                    	MS	USC00220488
BOONEVILLE                         	MS	USC00220955
BROOKHAVEN CITY                    	MS	USC00221094
CANTON 4N                          	MS	USC00221389
CLARKSDALE                         	MS	USC00221707
COLUMBIA                           	MS	USC00221865
COLUMBUS                           	MS	USC00221880
CORINTH 7 SW                       	MS	USC00221962
CRYSTAL SPGS EXP STN               	MS	USC00222094
FOREST                             	MS	USC00223107
GREENVILLE                         	MS	USC00223605
HATTIESBURG 5SW                    	MS	USC00223887
HERNANDO                           	MS	USC00223975
HOLLY SPRINGS 4 N                  	MS	USC00224173
KOSCIUSKO                          	MS	USC00224776
LAUREL                             	MS	USC00224939
LOUISVILLE                         	MS	USC00225247
MONTICELLO                         	MS	USC00225987
MOORHEAD                           	MS	USC00226009
NATCHEZ                            	MS	USC00226177
PASCAGOULA 3 NE                    	MS	USC00226718
PONTOTOC EXP STN                   	MS	USC00227111
POPLARVILLE EXP STN                	MS	USC00227128
PORT GIBSON 1 NE                   	MS	USC00227132
STATE UNIV                         	MS	USC00228374
UNIVERSITY                         	MS	USC00229079
WATER VALLEY                       	MS	USC00229400
WAVELAND                           	MS	USC00229426
WAYNESBORO 2 W                     	MS	USC00229439
WOODVILLE 4 ESE                    	MS	USC00229793
YAZOO CITY 5 NNE                   	MS	USC00229860
APPLETON CITY                      	MO	USC00230204
BOWLING GREEN 1 E                  	MO	USC00230856
BRUNSWICK                          	MO	USC00231037
CARUTHERSVILLE                     	MO	USC00231364
CLINTON                            	MO	USC00231711
CONCEPTION                         	MO	USC00231822
DONIPHAN                           	MO	USC00232289
FARMINGTON                         	MO	USC00232809
JEFFERSON CITY WTP                 	MO	USC00234271
LAMAR 2W                           	MO	USC00234705
LEBANON 2W                         	MO	USC00234825
LEES SUMMIT REED WR                	MO	USC00234850
LEXINGTON 3E                       	MO	USC00234904
LOCKWOOD                           	MO	USC00235027
MARBLE HILL                        	MO	USC00235253
MEXICO                             	MO	USC00235541
MOBERLY                            	MO	USC00235671
MTN GROVE 2 N                      	MO	USC00235834
NEOSHO                             	MO	USC00235976
ROLLA UNI OF MISSOURI              	MO	USC00237263
SPICKARD 7 W                       	MO	USC00237963
STEFFENVILLE                       	MO	USC00238051
SWEET SPRINGS                      	MO	USC00238223
TRUMAN DAM & RSVR                  	MO	USC00238466
UNIONVILLE                         	MO	USC00238523
WARRENTON 1 N                      	MO	USC00238725
ANACONDA                           	MT	USC00240199
AUGUSTA                            	MT	USC00240364
BIG TIMBER                         	MT	USC00240780
BOZEMAN MONTANA ST U               	MT	USC00241044
CASCADE 5 S                        	MT	USC00241552
CHINOOK                            	MT	USC00241722
CHOTEAU                            	MT	USC00241737
 DILLION U OF MONTANA WESTERN      	MT	USC00242409
EKALAKA                            	MT	USC00242689
ENNIS                              	MT	USC00242793
FLATWILLOW 4 ENE                   	MT	USC00243013
FORKS 4 NNE                        	MT	USC00243089
FT ASSINNIBOINE                    	MT	USC00243110
FORTINE 1 N                        	MT	USC00243139
GLENDIVE                           	MT	USC00243581
HAMILTON                           	MT	USC00243885
HEBGEN DAM                         	MT	USC00244038
HUNTLEY EXP STN                    	MT	USC00244345
HYSHAM 25 SSE                      	MT	USC00244364
JORDAN                             	MT	USC00244522
KALISPELL GLACIER AP               	MT	USC00244558
LIBBY 1 NE RS                      	MT	USC00245015
LIVINGSTON 12 S                    	MT	USC00245080
MALTA 7 E                          	MT	USC00245338
MEDICINE LAKE 3 SE                 	MT	USC00245572
MILDRED 5 N                        	MT	USC00245668
MOCCASIN EXP STN                   	MT	USC00245761
NORRIS MADISON PH                  	MT	USC00246157
PHILIPSBURG RS                     	MT	USC00246472
PLEVNA                             	MT	USC00246601
RED LODGE                          	MT	USC00246918
SAINT IGNATIUS                     	MT	USC00247286
SAINT REGIS 1 NE                   	MT	USC00247318
SAVAGE                             	MT	USC00247382
VALIER                             	MT	USC00248501
VIDA 6 NE                          	MT	USC00248569
VIRGINIA CITY                      	MT	USC00248597
WEST YELLOWSTONE                   	MT	USC00248857
WHITE SULPHUR SPRNGS 2             	MT	USC00248930
ALBION                             	NE	USC00250070
ALLIANCE 1WNW                      	NE	USC00250130
ASHLAND NO 2                       	NE	USC00250375
ATKINSON 3SW                       	NE	USC00250420
AUBURN 5 ESE                       	NE	USC00250435
BEATRICE 1N                        	NE	USC00250622
BEAVER CITY                        	NE	USC00250640
BRIDGEPORT                         	NE	USC00251145
BROKEN BOW 2 W                     	NE	USC00251200
CRETE                              	NE	USC00252020
CURTIS 3NNE                        	NE	USC00252100
DAVID CITY                         	NE	USC00252205
FAIRBURY 5S                        	NE	USC00252820
FAIRMONT                           	NE	USC00252840
FRANKLIN                           	NE	USC00253035
GENEVA                             	NE	USC00253175
GENOA 2 W                          	NE	USC00253185
GOTHENBURG                         	NE	USC00253365
HARRISON                           	NE	USC00253615
HARTINGTON                         	NE	USC00253630
HASTINGS 4N                        	NE	USC00253660
HAY SPRINGS 12 S                   	NE	USC00253715
HEBRON                             	NE	USC00253735
HOLDREGE                           	NE	USC00253910
IMPERIAL                           	NE	USC00254110
KIMBALL 2NE                        	NE	USC00254440
LODGEPOLE                          	NE	USC00254900
LOUP CITY                          	NE	USC00254985
MADISON                            	NE	USC00255080
		USC00255310
MERRIMAN                           	NE	USC00255470
MINDEN                             	NE	USC00255565
NORTH LOUP                         	NE	USC00256040
OAKDALE                            	NE	USC00256135
PAWNEE CITY                        	NE	USC00256570
PURDUM                             	NE	USC00256970
RED CLOUD                          	NE	USC00257070
SAINT PAUL                         	NE	USC00257515
SEWARD                             	NE	USC00257715
STAPLETON 5W                       	NE	USC00258133
SYRACUSE                           	NE	USC00258395
TECUMSEH 1S                        	NE	USC00258465
TEKAMAH                            	NE	USC00258480
WAKEFIELD                          	NE	USC00258915
WEEPING WATER                      	NE	USC00259090
YORK                               	NE	USC00259510
AUSTIN #2                          	NV	USC00260507
BOULDER CITY                       	NV	USC00261071
FALLON EXP STN                     	NV	USC00262780
GOLCONDA                           	NV	USC00263245
LOVELOCK                           	NV	USC00264698
MCGILL                             	NV	USC00264950
MINA                               	NV	USC00265168
SEARCHLIGHT                        	NV	USC00267369
WELLS                              	NV	USC00268988
BETHLEHEM 2                        	NH	USC00270706
DURHAM                             	NH	USC00272174
FIRST CONNECTICUT LAKE             	NH	USC00272999
HANOVER                            	NH	USC00273850
KEENE                              	NH	USC00274399
BELVIDERE BRG                      	NJ	USC00280734
BOONTON 1 SE                       	NJ	USC00280907
CHARLOTTEBURG RESERVE              	NJ	USC00281582
FLEMINGTON 5 NNW                   	NJ	USC00283029
HIGHTSTOWN 2 W                     	NJ	USC00283951
INDIAN MILLS 2 W                   	NJ	USC00284229
LONG BRANCH OAKHURST               	NJ	USC00284987
MOORESTOWN                         	NJ	USC00285728
NEW BRUNSWICK 3 SE                 	NJ	USC00286055
PLAINFIELD                         	NJ	USC00287079
TOMS RIVER                         	NJ	USC00288816
AZTEC RUINS NM                     	NM	USC00290692
BELL RANCH                         	NM	USC00290858
CARLSBAD                           	NM	USC00291469
CARRIZOZO 1SW                      	NM	USC00291515
CHAMA                              	NM	USC00291664
CIMARRON 4 SW                      	NM	USC00291813
DULCE                              	NM	USC00292608
ELEPHANT BUTTE DAM                 	NM	USC00292848
FT BAYARD                          	NM	USC00293265
FT SUMNER                          	NM	USC00293294
GAGE                               	NM	USC00293368
JEMEZ SPRINGS                      	NM	USC00294369
JORNADA EXP RANGE                  	NM	USC00294426
LAS VEGAS WWTP                     	NM	USC00294862
LOS LUNAS 3 SSW                    	NM	USC00295150
LUNA RS                            	NM	USC00295273
MTN PARK                           	NM	USC00295960
MOUNTAINAIR                        	NM	USC00295965
OROGRANDE                          	NM	USC00296435
RED RIVER                          	NM	USC00297323
SAN JON                            	NM	USC00297867
SANTA ROSA                         	NM	USC00298107
SOCORRO                            	NM	USC00298387
SPRINGER                           	NM	USC00298501
STATE UNIV                         	NM	USC00298535
TUCUMCARI 4 NE                     	NM	USC00299156
TULAROSA                           	NM	USC00299165
ADDISON                            	NY	USC00300023
ALFRED                             	NY	USC00300085
ALLEGANY SP                        	NY	USC00300093
ANGELICA                           	NY	USC00300183
AUBURN                             	NY	USC00300321
BATAVIA                            	NY	USC00300443
BRIDGEHAMPTON                      	NY	USC00300889
BROCKPORT                          	NY	USC00300937
CHAZY                              	NY	USC00301401
COOPERSTOWN                        	NY	USC00301752
CORTLAND                           	NY	USC00301799
DANNEMORA                          	NY	USC00301966
DANSVILLE                          	NY	USC00301974
DEPOSIT                            	NY	USC00302060
DOBBS FERRY-ARDSLEY                	NY	USC00302129
ELMIRA                             	NY	USC00302610
FREDONIA                           	NY	USC00303033
GENEVA RSCH FARM                   	NY	USC00303184
GLENHAM                            	NY	USC00303259
GLOVERSVILLE                       	NY	USC00303319
HEMLOCK                            	NY	USC00303773
INDIAN LAKE 2SW                    	NY	USC00304102
ITHACA CORNELL UNIV                	NY	USC00304174
LAKE PLACID 2 S                    	NY	USC00304555
LAWRENCEVILLE 3 SW                 	NY	USC00304647
LITTLE FALLS CITY RES              	NY	USC00304791
LITTLE FALLS MILL ST               	NY	USC00304796
LOCKPORT 3 S                       	NY	USC00304844
LOWVILLE                           	NY	USC00304912
MALONE                             	NY	USC00304996
EMMONS                             	NY	USC00305113
MOHONK LAKE                        	NY	USC00305426
MORRISVILLE 6 SW                   	NY	USC00305512
NORWICH                            	NY	USC00306085
OGDENSBURG 4 NE                    	NY	USC00306164
OSWEGO EAST                        	NY	USC00306314
PORT JERVIS                        	NY	USC00306774
SARATOGA SPRINGS 4 SW              	NY	USC00307484
SETAUKET STRONG                    	NY	USC00307633
STILLWATER RSVR                    	NY	USC00308248
TROY L&D                           	NY	USC00308600
TUPPER LAKE SUNMOUNT               	NY	USC00308631
WALDEN 1 ESE                       	NY	USC00308906
WALES                              	NY	USC00308910
WANAKENA RNGR SCHOOL               	NY	USC00308944
WATERTOWN                          	NY	USC00309000
WEST POINT                         	NY	USC00309292
YORKTOWN HEIGHTS 1W                	NY	USC00309670
ALBEMARLE                          	NC	USC00310090
CHAPEL HILL 2 W                    	NC	USC00311677
EDENTON                            	NC	USC00312635
ELIZABETH CITY                     	NC	USC00312719
FAYETTEVILLE PWC                   	NC	USC00313017
HENDERSON 2 NNW                    	NC	USC00313969
HENDERSONVILLE 1 NE                	NC	USC00313976
HIGHLANDS                          	NC	USC00314055
KINSTON 7 SE                       	NC	USC00314684
LENOIR                             	NC	USC00314938
LOUISBURG                          	NC	USC00315123
LUMBERTON                          	NC	USC00315177
MARION 2 NW                        	NC	USC00315340
MARSHALL                           	NC	USC00315356
MONROE 2 SE                        	NC	USC00315771
MOREHEAD CITY 2 WNW                	NC	USC00315830
MORGANTON                          	NC	USC00315838
MT AIRY 2 W                        	NC	USC00315890
REIDSVILLE 2 NW                    	NC	USC00317202
SALISBURY                          	NC	USC00317615
SMITHFIELD                         	NC	USC00317994
SOUTHPORT 5 N                      	NC	USC00318113
STATESVILLE 2 NNE                  	NC	USC00318292
TARBORO 1 S                        	NC	USC00318500
TRANSOU                            	NC	USC00318694
WAYNESVILLE 1 E                    	NC	USC00319147
WILSON 3 SW                        	NC	USC00319476
BOTTINEAU                          	ND	USC00320941
CASSELTON AGRONOMY FM              	ND	USC00321408
CROSBY                             	ND	USC00321871
DICKINSON EXP STN                  	ND	USC00322188
DUNN CENTER 1E                     	ND	USC00322365
FT YATES 4 SW                      	ND	USC00323207
FULLERTON 1 ESE                    	ND	USC00323287
GRAFTON                            	ND	USC00323594
GRAND FORKS UNIV NWS               	ND	USC00323621
HETTINGER                          	ND	USC00324178
HILLSBORO 3 N                      	ND	USC00324203
JAMESTOWN STATE HOSP               	ND	USC00324418
LANGDON EXP FARM                   	ND	USC00324958
LISBON                             	ND	USC00325220
MANDAN EXP STN                     	ND	USC00325479
MOFFIT 3 SE                        	ND	USC00326015
MOTT                               	ND	USC00326155
NAPOLEON                           	ND	USC00326255
NEW ENGLAND                        	ND	USC00326315
RICHARDTON ABBEY                   	ND	USC00327530
TOWNER 2 NE                        	ND	USC00328792
WAHPETON 3 N                       	ND	USC00329100
WILLOW CITY                        	ND	USC00329445
BUCYRUS                            	OH	USC00331072
CADIZ                              	OH	USC00331152
CHIPPEWA LAKE                      	OH	USC00331541
CIRCLEVILLE                        	OH	USC00331592
COSHOCTON WPC PLT                  	OH	USC00331890
DEFIANCE                           	OH	USC00332098
DELAWARE                           	OH	USC00332119
FINDLAY WPCC                       	OH	USC00332791
GREENVILLE WTP                     	OH	USC00333375
HILLSBORO                          	OH	USC00333758
HIRAM                              	OH	USC00333780
KENTON                             	OH	USC00334189
MC CONNELLSVILLE LK 7              	OH	USC00335041
MILLERSBURG                        	OH	USC00335297
MILLPORT 4 NE                      	OH	USC00335315
NORWALK WWTP                       	OH	USC00336118
OBERLIN                            	OH	USC00336196
PHILO 3 SW                         	OH	USC00336600
PORTSMOUTH-SCIOTOVILLE             	OH	USC00336781
TIFFIN                             	OH	USC00338313
UPPER SANDUSKY                     	OH	USC00338534
URBANA WWTP                        	OH	USC00338552
WARREN 3 S                         	OH	USC00338769
WAUSEON WTP                        	OH	USC00338822
WAVERLY                            	OH	USC00338830
WOOSTER EXP STATION                	OH	USC00339312
ADA                                	OK	USC00340017
ALTUS IRIG RSCH STN                	OK	USC00340179
ANTLERS                            	OK	USC00340256
ARDMORE                            	OK	USC00340292
BEAVER                             	OK	USC00340593
BOISE CITY 2 E                     	OK	USC00340908
BUFFALO 2 SSW                      	OK	USC00341243
CARNEGIE 5 NE                      	OK	USC00341504
CHEROKEE 4W                        	OK	USC00341724
CLAREMORE 2 ENE                    	OK	USC00341828
DURANT                             	OK	USC00342678
ENID                               	OK	USC00342912
ERICK                              	OK	USC00342944
GEARY                              	OK	USC00343497
GOODWELL RSCH STN                  	OK	USC00343628
GUTHRIE 5S                         	OK	USC00343821
HAMMON 3 SSW                       	OK	USC00343871
HENNESSEY 4 ESE                    	OK	USC00344055
HOLDENVILLE 2SSE                   	OK	USC00344235
HOOKER                             	OK	USC00344298
JEFFERSON                          	OK	USC00344573
KENTON                             	OK	USC00344766
KINGFISHER                         	OK	USC00344861
LAWTON                             	OK	USC00345063
MANGUM                             	OK	USC00345509
MEEKER 5 W                         	OK	USC00345779
MIAMI                              	OK	USC00345855
MUSKOGEE                           	OK	USC00346130
MUTUAL                             	OK	USC00346139
NEWKIRK 1NW                        	OK	USC00346278
OKEENE                             	OK	USC00346629
OKEMAH                             	OK	USC00346638
OKMULGEE WTR WKS                   	OK	USC00346670
PAULS VALLEY 4 WSW                 	OK	USC00346926
PAWHUSKA                           	OK	USC00346935
PERRY                              	OK	USC00347012
POTEAU WTR WKS                     	OK	USC00347254
STILLWATER 2 W                     	OK	USC00348501
TAHLEQUAH                          	OK	USC00348677
WAURIKA                            	OK	USC00349395
WEATHERFORD                        	OK	USC00349422
WEBBERS FALLS 5 WSW                	OK	USC00349445
ASHLAND                            	OR	USC00350304
BEND                               	OR	USC00350694
BROOKINGS 2 SE                     	OR	USC00351055
CASCADIA                           	OR	USC00351433
CONDON                             	OR	USC00351765
CORVALLIS STATE UNIV               	OR	USC00351862
COTTAGE GROVE 2E                   	OR	USC00351897
CRATER LAKE NPS HQ                 	OR	USC00351946
DANNER                             	OR	USC00352135
DRAIN                              	OR	USC00352406
DUFUR                              	OR	USC00352440
FOREST GROVE                       	OR	USC00352997
FREMONT 5 NW                       	OR	USC00353095
GRANTS PASS                        	OR	USC00353445
HEADWORKS PORTLAND WTR             	OR	USC00353770
HEPPNER                            	OR	USC00353827
HERMISTON 1 SE                     	OR	USC00353847
HOOD RIVER EXP STN                 	OR	USC00354003
KLAMATH FALLS 2 SSW                	OR	USC00354506
LAKEVIEW 2 NNW                     	OR	USC00354670
MALHEUR REFUGE HQ                  	OR	USC00355162
MCKENZIE BRG RS                    	OR	USC00355362
MC MINNVILLE                       	OR	USC00355384
MILTON FREEWATER                   	OR	USC00355593
MORO                               	OR	USC00355734
PAISLEY                            	OR	USC00356426
PILOT ROCK 1 SE                    	OR	USC00356634
PRINEVILLE                         	OR	USC00356883
PROSPECT 2 SW                      	OR	USC00356907
RIDDLE                             	OR	USC00357169
ROSEBURG KQEN                      	OR	USC00357331
THREE LYNX                         	OR	USC00358466
TILLAMOOK                          	OR	USC00358494
UNION EXP STN                      	OR	USC00358746
VALE                               	OR	USC00358797
WALLOWA                            	OR	USC00358997
CHAMBERSBURG 1 ESE                 	PA	USC00361354
EISENHOWER NHS                     	PA	USC00362537
FRANKLIN                           	PA	USC00363028
GREENVILLE 2 NE                    	PA	USC00363526
JOHNSTOWN                          	PA	USC00364385
LEBANON 2 W                        	PA	USC00364896
MONTROSE                           	PA	USC00365915
NEW CASTLE 1 N                     	PA	USC00366233
PALMERTON                          	PA	USC00366689
PLEASANT MT 1 W                    	PA	USC00367029
READING 4 NNW                      	PA	USC00367322
RIDGWAY                            	PA	USC00367477
SELINSGROVE 2 S                    	PA	USC00367931
STATE COLLEGE                      	PA	USC00368449
STROUDSBURG                        	PA	USC00368596
TOWANDA 1 S                        	PA	USC00368905
UNIONTOWN 1 NE                     	PA	USC00369050
WARREN                             	PA	USC00369298
WELLSBORO 4 SW                     	PA	USC00369408
WEST CHESTER 2 NW                  	PA	USC00369464
YORK 3 SSW PUMP STN                	PA	USC00369933
KINGSTON                           	RI	USC00374266
AIKEN 5SE                          	SC	USC00380074
ANDERSON                           	SC	USC00380165
BEAUFORT WWTP                      	SC	USC00380559
BLACKVILLE 3 W                     	SC	USC00380764
CALHOUN FALLS                      	SC	USC00381277
CAMDEN 3 W                         	SC	USC00381310
CHERAW                             	SC	USC00381588
CLEMSON UNIV                       	SC	USC00381770
COLUMBIA UNIV OF SC                	SC	USC00381944
CONWAY                             	SC	USC00381997
DARLINGTON                         	SC	USC00382260
GEORGETOWN 2 E                     	SC	USC00383468
GREENWOOD                          	SC	USC00383754
KERSHAW 1SW                        	SC	USC00384690
KINGSTREE                          	SC	USC00384753
LAURENS                            	SC	USC00385017
LITTLE MTN                         	SC	USC00385200
NEWBERRY                           	SC	USC00386209
ORANGEBURG 2                       	SC	USC00386527
SALUDA                             	SC	USC00387631
SANTUCK                            	SC	USC00387722
SUMMERVILLE 4W                     	SC	USC00388426
SUMTER                             	SC	USC00388440
WALHALLA                           	SC	USC00388887
WINNSBORO                          	SC	USC00389327
WINTHROP UNIV                      	SC	USC00389350
YEMASSEE                           	SC	USC00389469
ACADEMY 2NE                        	SD	USC00390043
ALEXANDRIA                         	SD	USC00390128
CANTON                             	SD	USC00391392
CLARK                              	SD	USC00391739
COTTONWOOD 2 E                     	SD	USC00391972
DUPREE                             	SD	USC00392429
EUREKA                             	SD	USC00392797
FAULKTON 1 NW                      	SD	USC00392927
FORESTBURG 4 NNE                   	SD	USC00393029
GANN VALLEY 4NW                    	SD	USC00393217
HIGHMORE 1 W                       	SD	USC00393832
HOT SPRINGS                        	SD	USC00394007
HOWARD                             	SD	USC00394037
KENNEBEC                           	SD	USC00394516
MELLETTE 4 W                       	SD	USC00395456
MENNO                              	SD	USC00395481
MILBANK 4 NW                       	SD	USC00395536
MURDO                              	SD	USC00395891
OAHE DAM                           	SD	USC00396170
RAPID CITY 4NW                     	SD	USC00396947
VERMILLION 2 SE                    	SD	USC00398622
WOOD                               	SD	USC00399442
CLARKSVILLE WWTP                   	TN	USC00401790
COPPERHILL                         	TN	USC00402024
COVINGTON 3 SW                     	TN	USC00402108
CROSSVILLE ED & RESEARCH           	TN	USC00402202
DICKSON                            	TN	USC00402489
DOVER 1 W                          	TN	USC00402589
JACKSON EXP STN                    	TN	USC00404561
LEWISBURG EXP STN                  	TN	USC00405187
MC MINNVILLE                       	TN	USC00405882
MURFREESBORO 5 N                   	TN	USC00406371
NEWPORT 1 NW                       	TN	USC00406534
ROGERSVILLE 1 NE                   	TN	USC00407884
TULLAHOMA                          	TN	USC00409155
UNION CITY                         	TN	USC00409219
WAYNESBORO                         	TN	USC00409502
ALBANY                             	TX	USC00410120
ALICE                              	TX	USC00410144
ALPINE                             	TX	USC00410174
BALLINGER 2 NW                     	TX	USC00410493
BALMORHEA                          	TX	USC00410498
BEEVILLE 5 NE                      	TX	USC00410639
BLANCO                             	TX	USC00410832
BOERNE                             	TX	USC00410902
BOYS RANCH                         	TX	USC00411000
BRENHAM                            	TX	USC00411048
BROWNWOOD 2ENE                     	TX	USC00411138
CATARINA                           	TX	USC00411528
CLARKSVILLE 2NE                    	TX	USC00411772
CORSICANA                          	TX	USC00412019
CROSBYTON                          	TX	USC00412121
DANEVANG 1 W                       	TX	USC00412266
DUBLIN 2SE                         	TX	USC00412598
EAGLE PASS 3N                      	TX	USC00412679
ENCINAL                            	TX	USC00412906
FALFURRIAS                         	TX	USC00413063
FLATONIA 4SE                       	TX	USC00413183
FT STOCKTON                        	TX	USC00413280
GAINESVILLE 5 ENE                  	TX	USC00413420
GREENVILLE KGVL RADIO              	TX	USC00413734
HALLETTSVILLE 2 N                  	TX	USC00413873
HASKELL                            	TX	USC00413992
LAMPASAS                           	TX	USC00415018
LIBERTY                            	TX	USC00415196
LLANO                              	TX	USC00415272
LULING                             	TX	USC00415429
MARSHALL                           	TX	USC00415618
MCCAMEY                            	TX	USC00415707
MEXIA                              	TX	USC00415869
MIAMI                              	TX	USC00415875
MULESHOE #1                        	TX	USC00416135
NEW BRAUNFELS                      	TX	USC00416276
PARIS                              	TX	USC00416794
PECOS                              	TX	USC00416892
PLAINVIEW                          	TX	USC00417079
QUANAH 2 SW                        	TX	USC00417336
RIO GRANDE CITY                    	TX	USC00417622
SEMINOLE                           	TX	USC00418201
SNYDER                             	TX	USC00418433
STRATFORD                          	TX	USC00418692
TEMPLE                             	TX	USC00418910
WEATHERFORD                        	TX	USC00419532
ALTON                              	UT	USC00420086
BLANDING                           	UT	USC00420738
BLUFF                              	UT	USC00420788
CORINNE                            	UT	USC00421731
DESERET                            	UT	USC00422101
DUCHESNE                           	UT	USC00422253
ESCALANTE                          	UT	USC00422592
FARMINGTON 3 NW                    	UT	USC00422726
FILLMORE                           	UT	USC00422828
FT DUCHESNE                        	UT	USC00422996
GREEN RIVER AVIATION               	UT	USC00423418
HEBER                              	UT	USC00423809
KANAB                              	UT	USC00424508
LAKETOWN                           	UT	USC00424856
LEVAN                              	UT	USC00425065
LOGAN UTAH ST UNIV                 	UT	USC00425186
MANTI                              	UT	USC00425402
MARYSVALE                          	UT	USC00425477
MOAB                               	UT	USC00425733
MORGAN POWER & LIGHT               	UT	USC00425826
NEPHI                              	UT	USC00426135
OGDEN PIONEER PH                   	UT	USC00426404
PANGUITCH                          	UT	USC00426601
PAROWAN                            	UT	USC00426686
RICHFIELD RADIO KSVC               	UT	USC00427260
ST GEORGE                          	UT	USC00427516
SALINA 24 E                        	UT	USC00427559
SCIPIO                             	UT	USC00427714
SCOFIELD-SKYLINE MINE              	UT	USC00427729
SNAKE CREEK POWERHOUSE             	UT	USC00427909
SPANISH FORK PWR HOUSE             	UT	USC00428119
THOMPSON                           	UT	USC00428705
TOOELE                             	UT	USC00428771
UTAH LAKE LEHI                     	UT	USC00428973
		USC00429111
WOODRUFF                           	UT	USC00429595
ZION NP                            	UT	USC00429717
CAVENDISH                          	VT	USC00431243
CHELSEA                            	VT	USC00431360
CORNWALL                           	VT	USC00431580
ENOSBURG FALLS                     	VT	USC00432769
		USC00437054
SOUTH HERO                         	VT	USC00437607
SOUTH LINCOLN                      	VT	USC00437612
BLACKSBURG NWSO                    	VA	USC00440766
BREMO BLUFF                        	VA	USC00440993
BURKES GARDEN                      	VA	USC00441209
CHARLOTTESVILLE 2W                 	VA	USC00441593
DALE ENTERPRISE                    	VA	USC00442208
DANVILLE                           	VA	USC00442245
FARMVILLE 2 N                      	VA	USC00442941
FREDERICKSBURG NP                  	VA	USC00443192
HOPEWELL                           	VA	USC00444101
HOT SPRINGS                        	VA	USC00444128
LEXINGTON                          	VA	USC00444876
LINCOLN                            	VA	USC00444909
PENNINGTON GAP                     	VA	USC00446626
PIEDMONT RSCH STN                  	VA	USC00446712
ROCKY MT                           	VA	USC00447338
STAUNTON WATER TRMTMT PLT          	VA	USC00448062
WILLIAMSBURG 2 N                   	VA	USC00449151
WOODSTOCK 2 NE                     	VA	USC00449263
ABERDEEN                           	WA	USC00450008
BELLINGHAM 3 SSW                   	WA	USC00450587
BLAINE                             	WA	USC00450729
BUCKLEY 1 NE                       	WA	USC00450945
CEDAR LAKE                         	WA	USC00451233
CENTRALIA                          	WA	USC00451276
CLEARBROOK                         	WA	USC00451484
CLE ELUM                           	WA	USC00451504
COLVILLE                           	WA	USC00451630
CONCONULLY                         	WA	USC00451666
CUSHMAN POWERHOUSE 2               	WA	USC00451939
DAVENPORT                          	WA	USC00452007
DAYTON 1 WSW                       	WA	USC00452030
ELLENSBURG                         	WA	USC00452505
EVERETT                            	WA	USC00452675
FORKS 1 E                          	WA	USC00452914
GOLDENDALE                         	WA	USC00453222
KENNEWICK                          	WA	USC00454154
LONG BEACH EXP STN                 	WA	USC00454748
LONGMIRE RAINIER NPS               	WA	USC00454764
LONGVIEW                           	WA	USC00454769
MC MILLIN RSVR                     	WA	USC00455224
NORTHPORT                          	WA	USC00455946
ODESSA                             	WA	USC00456039
OLGA 2 SE                          	WA	USC00456096
POMEROY                            	WA	USC00456610
PORT ANGELES                       	WA	USC00456624
PORT TOWNSEND                      	WA	USC00456678
PULLMAN 2 NW                       	WA	USC00456789
RAYMOND 2 S                        	WA	USC00456914
RITZVILLE 1 SSE                    	WA	USC00457059
ST. JOHN                           	WA	USC00457267
SEDRO WOOLLEY                      	WA	USC00457507
SNOQUALMIE FALLS                   	WA	USC00457773
STEHEKIN 4 NW                      	WA	USC00458059
SUNNYSIDE                          	WA	USC00458207
VANCOUVER 4 NNE                    	WA	USC00458773
WATERVILLE                         	WA	USC00459012
WENATCHEE                          	WA	USC00459074
WILBUR                             	WA	USC00459238
WINTHROP 1 WSW                     	WA	USC00459376
BUCKHANNON                         	WV	USC00461220
CAIRO                              	WV	USC00461330
GLENVILLE                          	WV	USC00463544
LEWISBURG 3 N                      	WV	USC00465224
MANNINGTON 8 WNW                   	WV	USC00465626
PARSONS 1 NE                       	WV	USC00466867
PICKENS 2 N                        	WV	USC00466989
PINEVILLE                          	WV	USC00467029
SPENCER                            	WV	USC00468384
WELLSBURG WTR TRMT PL              	WV	USC00469368
WILLIAMSON                         	WV	USC00469610
WINFIELD LOCKS                     	WV	USC00469683
ASHLAND EXP FARM                   	WI	USC00470349
BOWLER                             	WI	USC00470991
BRODHEAD                           	WI	USC00471078
DARLINGTON                         	WI	USC00472001
FOND DU LAC                        	WI	USC00472839
HANCOCK EXP FARM                   	WI	USC00473405
LANCASTER 4 WSW                    	WI	USC00474546
MANITOWOC                          	WI	USC00475017
MARSHFIELD EXP FARM                	WI	USC00475120
MEDFORD                            	WI	USC00475255
MILWAUKEE MT MARY CLG              	WI	USC00475474
MINOCQUA                           	WI	USC00475516
NEILLSVILLE 3 SW                   	WI	USC00475808
NEW LONDON                         	WI	USC00475932
OCONTO 4 W                         	WI	USC00476208
OSHKOSH                            	WI	USC00476330
PORTAGE                            	WI	USC00476718
PRAIRIE DU CHIEN                   	WI	USC00476827
RACINE                             	WI	USC00476922
SPOONER AG RES STN                 	WI	USC00478027
STANLEY                            	WI	USC00478110
VIROQUA                            	WI	USC00478827
WATERTOWN                          	WI	USC00478919
ALTA 1 NNW                         	WY	USC00480140
BASIN                              	WY	USC00480540
BATES CREEK #2                     	WY	USC00480552
CHUGWATER                          	WY	USC00481730
CODY                               	WY	USC00481840
COLONY                             	WY	USC00481905
DIVERSION DAM                      	WY	USC00482595
DUBOIS                             	WY	USC00482715
EVANSTON 1 E                       	WY	USC00483100
GREEN RIVER                        	WY	USC00484065
LAKE YELLOWSTONE                   	WY	USC00485345
LUSK 2 SW                          	WY	USC00485830
MIDWEST                            	WY	USC00486195
MORAN 5WNW                         	WY	USC00486440
NEWCASTLE                          	WY	USC00486660
PAVILLION                          	WY	USC00487115
PINE BLUFFS 5W                     	WY	USC00487240
PINEDALE                           	WY	USC00487260
POWELL FLD STN                     	WY	USC00487388
RIVERTON                           	WY	USC00487760
SARATOGA                           	WY	USC00487990
SHERIDAN FLD STA                   	WY	USC00488160
TORRINGTON EXP FARM                	WY	USC00488995
WHEATLAND 4 N                      	WY	USC00489615
WORLAND                            	WY	USC00489770
YELLOWSTONE PK MAMMOTH             	WY	USC00489905
About these ads

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

480 Responses to 2013 Will Finish One Of The Ten Coldest Years In US History, With The Largest Drop In Temperature

  1. I read a post at WUWT and Mosher declared that the raw temperature data was garbage. Fortunately he has created algorithms that will take that rubbish temperature data and turn it into good temperature data.

    • The raw data matches satellite data very closely. The adjusted data doesn’t.

    • John B., M.D. says:

      I guess they think the raw data is bad because it doesn’t fit the model.

      Kinda like what they did with the Envisat data which matched tidal gauges, but didn’t match the other satellites with their systematic errors.

    • Brad says:

      He also said Steven’s analysis is incorrect:

      “The fact is global temperatures have been flat for the past 17 years. There is no warminge even using all the fiddled data from hadcrut giss etc.. The BEST project was just an exercize in futility trying to flog a dead horse just like all the adjusments done by GISS etc just look at Steven Goddard endless graphs of manipulated USA data. LOL RSS and Uha show no warming at all for tropics and SH ie no global warming since 1979 either, LOL”

      1. yes the temperatures have been flatish for 17 years. people on relying on the accuracy of our method to make the ‘flat’ claim. get it? the whole claim that there is a pause DEPENDS on us doing things correctly.

      2. Goddard is wrong. He neglects to mention that

      A) the data in his comparisons are two entirely different datasets
      B) the results he compares use two differrent algorithms
      C) hansens results can be replicated using entirely different data and different methods

      3. We agree with UAH . thats the point of this poster. When you trust them you vindicate us

    • ChrisGC says:

      Isn’t that interesting! Kind of like how so many “scientists” created “Algore-ithms” that took cherry picked data and turned it into what they wanted it to say so it supported their theory of glowBULL warming!

    • Jim Y says:

      So have NOAA and NASA. So you can add WUWT and Mosher to those who adjust, er I mean, fudge data

  2. Wyguy says:

    November 2013 was the warmest global temperature on record. Weather Underground told me so. And I full trust them…..NOT.

  3. Andy DC says:

    Record cooling is totally consistent with a warming planet. In all seriousness, there has been no warming at all since 1930. When you get away from tampered data and UHI, this has all been much to do about nothing. Nevertheless, the Boston University alumni rag said that by 2100, the Arctic will have the same climate as the southern US!

    On the other hand, it is apparent that Henry Ford’s evil Model T caused warming between 1900 and 1930.

  4. Organic Fool says:

    “Show Trial” Science

    “The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial in which there is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant. The actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning to other would-be dissidents or transgressors. Show trials tend to be retributive rather than correctional justice and also conducted for propagandistic purposes. The term was first recorded in the 1930s.” – wikidedia

    See also “Kangaroo Court”, “Lynching”, “Mock Trial”, “Star Chamber”

    Today, the global warming myth is a show trial and kangaroo courtroom. This same method has been employed largely by the medical and pharmaceutical industries to force the idea that natural saturated fat from animals, like butter, cream, eggs, bacon, lard, etc causes heart disease. You can recognize it by its dogmatic approach where the opposing evidence is not presented at all. The end result is usually a product which is needed, such as statin drugs and “low-fat” food products like margarine which do not contain cholesterol. The natural foods are demonized, even though they have been the main source of food for millions of people throughout history. Original margarine was made from lard when butter was sent off to soldiers. This was when people lived on farms and they often lived to 100 years or more, with complete sets of teeth. The fat soluble vitamins are required for human health, and they exist in animal fats. The fat portion of milk contains these nutrients as well, which makes drinking skim or low-fat milk an unhealthy choice and makes cream the best choice when it comes to vitamins, according to real science not mock science.

    The global warming debate is one big mock trial. The jury is the public. Only the Prosecution is allowed to present evidence. This is akin to a certain tribunals and Totalitarian regimes. The desired outcome is rigged from the start.

    My friends are turning to the Dark Side. It is sad to see. We can confront them on this by reminding them about such kangaroo tactics and ask them if they believe it is honest to completely ignore other variables that other scientists point out, such as the sun, El Nino, Earth’s orbit and the evidence for a coming cooling. When friends or family call someone a denier, remind them that they would have Kepler, Copernicus or Galileo shut down because they were in the 3%? Science can be like Church for some people. I see it as a form of idolatry. We are to bow down to the CO2 God or we’ll go to hell, do not collect $200.

    “Science is settled” is simply another way to silence the opposition and kill debate.

  5. Dave N says:

    Remember that highlighting a cold month or year is “cherry picking”; when you’re an alarmist (preferably with a PhD, because they can’t be wrong) and highlight a warm month or year, it’s called “science”.

    • ChrisGC says:

      How about when highlighting 7 or 8 consecutive years of increasing record cold and snowfall in both northern and southern hemispheres occurs in the face of the doom and gloom predictions of a warming that stopped over 15 years ago?

    • Many of the PHD scientist that you refer to are not even meteorologists or atmospheric phyicists, etc. They are social scientist, with a left social bent, more commonly referred to as environmental scientist (better known as tree huggers). Also, there is no such thing as settled science, an emotional term used when there is no scientific evidence to prove their point. Climatology in reality is the study of past weather observations/patterns and by definition can not be used to predict the future. Finally, models must be validated based on recored past data before you can use them to remotely attemtyp to predict a future event. The farther out the prediction the greater the degree of uncertainty. I have seen no evidence that any of the GW models ahve ever been vbalidated or the data that was used to validate the models.

      • Don says:

        This is a great point. I am an energy efficiency consultant and belong to many LinkedIn groups that supposedly cater to energy efficiency professionals. Every single group moderator is a “communications” professional. They allow the AGW posters to rant and rave and make BS arguments, but stifle posts opposing AGW. It is almost as if they want to influence people.

  6. John B., M.D. says:

    The excuses for the alarmists will be:
    1) The U.S. is less than 2% of the global surface area.
    2) The melting Arctic ice shifted the pattern of the jet stream and made the U.S. colder than average. Global warming causes cooling.
    3) USHCN data bad, adjusted GISS data good.
    4) Weather is getting more extreme. Won’t even mention temps. Only mention things that fit the narrative.

    • John B., M.D. says:

      5) Ignore the data for the full year, just point to November as the hottest ever (ignore RSS and UAH data sets).

      • November was well below normal in the US

        • John B., M.D. says:

          They will say ignore the U.S., just pay attention to the global data for just one month November. Ignore the data for the full year. Distract and point to something else. Remember their theory is not falsifiable, one of the hallmarks of pseudoscience.

  7. Organic Fool says:

    Scientific method says nothing about consensus but about challenging a theory when predictions prove false. Henrik Svensmark has shown a correlation between cosmic rays and cloud cover as well as temperature modification on Earth. This was published in peer reviewed journals. CO2 alarmists, of course, dismiss this information.

    “The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[2] The Oxford English Dictionary defines the scientific method as: “a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.”[3]

    The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself,[discuss] supporting a theory when a theory’s predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false.”
    – wikipedia

    • Sid says:

      Well said – the big debate seems to be more between people who want to believe in the climate change models that predict global warming and the people who let the data tell the story. These plots are not consistent with CO2 global warming theories.

    • steve says:

      I have been following Henrik’s work for many years and in my personal life I have been educating those around me about his climate mechanism. One of the interesting results of his work, is how the greenhouse gas consensus has become what they despise. When remembering my public and college education it is interesting how often we were instructed about the persecution of Galileo by the parochial consensus. It appears now the tables have turned and the anthropogenic warming believers have become the parochial consensus they so often argued against. Its unfortunate, that main stream climate science has allowed the temptation of political power and control to corrupt the scientific method. As a practicing geologist I’m disappointed to see this and have no doubt that if political influence is not removed from climate science it will eventually affect all of us adversely. Looks like history is repeating itself.

  8. Joni Olson says:

    buried on the back page of the Louisville-courier 12/19/2013 was an article stating November 2013 was one of the warmest on record –thank goodness for the drudge report

  9. HL Mencken says:

    When are two alarmists willing to step forward to debate
    the issue with two knowledgeable and articulate
    spokesmen from the skeptics camp, as happened
    in New York City in 2007? I think you already
    know the answer. Not soon. Because they realized they
    will lose the debate. HL Mencken

  10. MCW says:

    It’s due to global warming don’t cha know.

  11. mrtelco1948 says:

    Isn’t Global Warming wonderful?

  12. ron says:

    And this is just the USA.. World wide the exclusion of 12.5% of the Earth’s landmass from temperature recording stations over the last 50+ years kind of skews the warming data.
    “The number of [Siberian] stations increased from 8 in 1901 to 23 in 1951 and then decreased to
    12 from 1989 to present only four (4) stations, those at Irkutsk, Bratsk, Chita and Kirensk, cover the entire 20th century.

    http://climateaudit.org/2009/12/21/climategatekeeping-siberia/

  13. Bob Smith says:

    No matter what facts you present to the liberals, they will ALWAYS believe whatever lie the data refutes, especially if it is a pet belief, such as “man-made global warming”.

  14. Bob Smith says:

    It’s gotten to the point where all the “scientists” who fell for the man-made global warming hoax (started as a legitimate theory, but has been refuted by data), are just too proud to admit they have been knowingly complicit in it as well. (sort of like hanging on to the notion that electing Obama was not a mistake)

    • Itswarmingdude says:

      2013 was one of the warmest winters on record in Europe. The conspiracy theorists on this blog seem to be unaware that the Earth includes more than just North America.

      • Broadlands says:

        “Before NASA and NOAA start tampering with the data, 2013 is one of the ten coldest years in the US since 1895, and has had the largest year over year decline on record. NOAA of course won’t talk about this, and will massively tamper with the data before releasing it.”

        Is massive tampering a conspiracy charge from the blog theorists here?
        And, how did 2013 turn out? 84th coldest? and tied with 1910 at 52.42°F
        Must have been a really massive tampering conspiracy, at least in part of North America.

        • Broadlands says:

          Yes, Steve…others have done the same or similar thing…http://rankexploits.com/musings/2012/a-surprising-validation-of-ushcn-adjustments/. No hint of conspiracy or use of the non-scientific word, “tampering”. Back before there was an NCDC to “tamper”, the US Weather Bureau published the data, monthly, for all states. Presumably, there was no tampering, certainly no reason to tamper. How does your “measured” data (which is from NCDC?) compare with theirs?

        • “My data” (HCN) agrees very closely with Hansen 1999. He must have been in on “my conspiracy” too

          http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/

          You come across as an extremely arrogant person. Condescension won’t serve you well here.

        • Shazaam says:

          Aw Steve,

          You might cut the guy a break. After all, it took him 4 1/2 months to think-up a response to this posting. So after all that skull sweat, he’s quite proud.

          Have a little pity on your “less-than-quick-witted” posters….
          ;)

        • Broadlands says:

          Yes, 4 and ½ months… of dead silence. Not one word about Mr. Goddard’s inaccurate forecast on how cold 2013 was going to be. Had he been even close it would have been noticed somewhere, especially following on 2012’s record high it would have been unprecedented in the US. But, instead of top-ten, 84th? I guess he’s been cut some slack. Complaining about NCDC’s’ tampered’ temperatures while simultaneously comparing them to NCDC “measured” temperatures? This is Real Science? Really?

      • Organic Fool says:

        “is it a conspiracy? I don’t do conspiracies, I just present the data and let you decide.”

        Dr. Don Easterbrook, Prof. Emeritus of Geology, Western WA Univ, to the Senate Energy, Environment and Telecommunications Cmte. Explains why the data shows the Earth is cooling, not warming, over the last 15 years. Look up Piers Corbyn (climate scientist and astrophysicist) to learn his projection for much harsher winters over next 20 years as we return to possible mini ice-age conditions but at least similar to 1970s. The jet stream has changed to the pattern and began in 1999, both of these scientists claim. Let me guess, you want us all to stop eating animals, live in Boulder, wear spandex, eat tofu, drink soy milk, and drive a Prius? That will stop the climate change.

        • Broadlands says:

          Awaiting moderation? For two hours? Let’s try again.

          “Before NASA and NOAA start tampering with the data, 2013 is one of the ten coldest years in the US since 1895, and has had the largest year over year decline on record. NOAA of course won’t talk about this, and will massively tamper with the data before releasing it.”

          Is massive tampering a conspiracy charge from the blog theorists here?
          And, how did 2013 turn out? Not even close. The 84th coldest? and tied with 1910 at 52.42°F
          Must have been a really massive tampering conspiracy, at least in part of North America.

        • The entire US trend is due to tampering.

        • Broadlands says:

          The ENTIRE US database has been tampered? So, it IS a huge NCDC conspiracy to hide the truth? But, not in Europe I gather, nor over the last 15 years here. If NCDC cannot be trusted, where do you find the untampered truth, the real raw “measured” temperatures, back to 1895? Can you point to your source so others can look at these values to be sure that you are not making all this up?

        • I don’t know of anyone else who has done it, But you can reproduce my work, Here is the source code.

          http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/ghcn-code/

  15. DarkStarAz says:

    Who’s in denial now?

  16. “But it’s climate CHANGE, not GLOBAL WARMING!”

    “JUST GIVE US YOUR MONEY! WE DON’T HAVE TIME TO EXPLAIN!”

  17. josetoyou says:

    Somebody educate “al gore”; he has got to know abou this revelation….

  18. Mossey says:

    Man-made-global warming is real! I know because Bill Nye the Science Guy said so. Uh, nevermind he’s not an actual scientist.

  19. Hal Slusher says:

    Don’t worry a tweek here a slight adjustment and you get just the numbers you were looking for all along. Like the people telling us what inflation is the same ones who decide how much you social security benefits go up.

  20. Shane says:

    I don’t believe you Steven. I think NASA and NOIA will revise the data to make it one of the warmer years so it goes down as the global warming they know is happening. It will be revised by thermometer correction factors. Then who you going to believe, your lying eyes or them :)

  21. Gerald Smith says:

    Algore said that if the oceans didn’t absorb so much carbon emissions and heat, the earth’s temperature would be 200 degrees higher. Hey, Al, that’s the way the ecosystem works, you fool! If I had wings I would be able to fly but wings aren’t in man’s DNA!

    • FutureUser says:

      Interesting stuff on Wikipedia about partial pressures, Henry’s Law, and CO2 dissolution in water. Turns out that CO2 converts to carbolic acid in a tiny fraction…. So it’s not causing the oceans to acidify. Much more likely…. Roundup herbicide runoff.

  22. RTC says:

    Al Gore could NOT be reached for comment …..

  23. Nick Wilson says:

    Cold, just how Matthew Drudge likes it.

  24. Jay Lison says:

    Good luck getting the “scientists” to come around on this. It is religious in nature for the left. It will take 50 years or more to get them to see reality. The way the left is today, they are so intolerant to anyone who says a word out of line, it’s hard to see how they ever come around. Just visit a college campus. It’s like stepping into a Soviet re-education camp. Free thought has been completely stomped out, and the scientists at these places have removed anyone who disagrees at all with their “theory”. It’s a scary time for western civilization.

    • Steve says:

      You are missing the big picture. Wealth Redistribution is the true religion… taking from the producers of wealth (the haves) and giving to the consumers (the have nots) on a global scale. As soon as the developing nations stop allowing themselves to be extorted then the “Global Warming” sect will die out. When the Wealth Redistribution religion already sees the writing on the wall and will drop the Global Warming sect like a hot potato as soon as the last monies have been gotten. I would give this about 2-3 more years. Not the 50 years you predict.

  25. Steve says:

    I joined the “Global Warming” religion a few years ago and with the data coming out that we could be entering a mini-ice age I am happy they changed the name to “Climate Change”. This is so cool because it doesn’t matter if its getting hotter or colder since either way we can blame the evil corporations and extort money from the developing nations. Al Gore, our High Preist, has made millions off this new religion and I’m raking in some nice dough as a solar panel installer. Life is good. Just lay back and enjoy it.

    • Tracy says:

      We have a name for the true believers of the Truth, as spoken by the High Priest, “Algorians”. Only they will be forgiven of their carbon debt when the planet melts/freezes. (or whatever He tells them is happening). Be still, and know Al Gore is the messenger of our carbon path of salvation.

      Silly scientists, your charts and data are only distractions.

  26. jnsesq says:

    Incontrovertible proof that driving SUVs causes global warming.

  27. Tracy says:

    Thank you.

  28. Henry Clark says:

    With a solar Grand Minimum approaching and with the fit of un-“adjusted” temperature history (and the derivative of sea level rise, average cloud cover, & more) to solar/cosmic-ray forcing, as illustrated with references in the following:

    … We are in for far more cooling later this decade and beyond.

  29. Vic Proulx says:

    The government cares not what is said here, or anywhere, when the time comes they will transportation away from all but the elite. For our own good.

  30. Dee says:

    * record-breaking droughts
    * record-breaking tornadoes
    * record-breaking heat
    * record-breaking snow

    All of these since Japan’s nuclear meltdowns (Fukushima) of March 2011, where nuclear radiation blanketed the Northern Hemisphere with radiation

    This radiation absolutely affects the atmosphere and weather; as they’ve known since atomic testing that it does.

    See this radioactive plume map that shows the Fukushima radiation blanketing the U.S., etc.

    In addition, the highly recommended site http://www.enenews.com has been following Japan’s nuclear crisis daily, and reporting on how it’s affecting the Pacific Ocean and human health.

    .

  31. SojournerTruth says:

    The politicization of science has ruined the environment for honest research. Once truth is replaced with the quest for political power, confusion reigns supreme. The idea of man-made global warming is completely man-made and does not reflect the claims made by its proponents. In the sixties, we had the population bomb of Paul Ehrlich, which proclaimed global starvation and chaos by the end of the millennium due to unrestrained breeding among humans. China fell for the ploy, and established the one child law to defuse the population bomb. Their problems were solved by capitalism, not contraceptives. The politicization of the weather is just another scam created to justify more taxes and higher energy costs.

    • Steve says:

      Good analysis. You are starting to connect some of the dots. But be careful. If you connect just a few more dots you could become a danger and an enemy to the Holy State of America. You may find yourself being audited by the IRS and experiencing a few other inconveniences like losing your job unexpectedly if you work for a Union or Government entity (yes, the NSA does know who you are).

  32. gator69 says:

    “One example of what I mean is the repeated insistence that pacific blue fin tuna have become so irradiated that they dangerous to eat. When actually the Fukushima radiation that would come from a tuna steak taken off a fish caught off the west coast would be around and about one twentieth of the radiation you would ingest from eating a normal banana. Which isn’t something we normally consider to be dangerous really.”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/16/fukushima-radiation-in-pacific-tuna-is-equal-to-one-twentieth-of-a-banana/

  33. Diogenes says:

    Gore told us the arctic ice would be gone by 2013, yet it has increased by 50%. Go figure.

  34. Steve says:

    Anyone want to mention that we are in the throes of the lowest Sun Spot activity in 100 years??? Low sun sopt activity leads to cooler weather since the sun’s output of energy has somewhat dereased!!! How come the Sun is left out of any kind of real science and investigation, since it is the main cause of all of our cycles of warming and cooling? Again, I said the MAIN cause!!

    Remember, how back in the mid-70’s the “Global Warming Alarmists” were pushing “GLOBAL COOLING”?? Which is it?? Arctic Ice is 50 % larger this time this year than last and the ice in Anarctica is thcker than it was last year!!! More proof that global warming is a hoax!

    With all the fuss about CO2 being thrown into our atmosphere, doesn’t the oceans and all the greenery worldwide use this to survive and then replace that CO2 with Oxygen for we humans to breathe and also survive??? Is everyone brain dead on the LEFT for believing this garbage of Global Warming???

  35. Teddy Novak says:

    Global warming (aka climate change) is the religion of the stupid.

    http://www.zazzle.com/FirstPrinciples?rf=238518351914519699

  36. Sabo says:

    Al (global warming ) gore is sure quiet.
    All I’m hearing are crickets

  37. allhaileris says:

    It doesn’t matter. They already ditched “global warming” and have renamed their church “global climate change”. Now they can explain any weather event. Coldest winter? That’s global climate change. Warm winter? Rainy summer? Dry summer? Heavy hurricane season? No hurricanes? First snow in Cairo in 100 years? Who cares how it snowed there 100 years ago, and every time before that? If it snows there NOW, it’s…? Yup. Global climate change. We need more government funded studies to make sense of this, so pointy-headed academics can have careers. We need new sources of “revenue” to fund the daddy state, so let’s regulate and tax toxic carbon dioxide emitters so everybody can have “free” healthcare, food, housing, and education (for those that still wish to bother).

  38. throbo@gmail.com says:

    Morons, look at the polar ice sheets over the last 50 years. If the earth is not warming why are they getting smaller?

    • Global sea ice area is second highest on record for the date.

      • Warren College says:

        This little exchange nicely sums up the debate between alarmists and non-alarmists. Somebody should save it for posterity.

    • FutureUser says:

      1. Local warming (of a polar area) is not the same as global warming (of all land and sea areas).
      2. Solar flux may be higher, yet temperatures lower, if the air is clearer. Considering that 2nd Pres. Bush pushed through a law mandating ultra-low-sulfur diesel, it’s not surprising that solar flux would be higher. This may cause more ice melting, without causing temperatures to rise. The ice temps would not rise while the ice is melting; the energy is being used to change the state at 32 deg. F.
      3. 50 years is not a long time in Earth’s history. 500 years would give a much better view of trends.
      4. Wind and ocean currents may have a greater effect on ice melts, that simple global average temperatures.
      5. This year’s ice is well ahead of trend. While one point does not a trend make, it may imply an inflection point in the trend.

  39. david boleneus says:

    If you could do a favor, many would appreciate this. The HCN data is accessible via the FTP (yes), and you give the station list, but that is not enough and the problem is the data is not usable unless you use database software, perhaps MS Access or other choice, to manipulate that “daily” data that comes from the HCN website. A benefit for those wishing to see and use the HCN data from a particular station would be to provide a tool, maybe via a website or downloadable one, for those of us wishing to view individual station data.

      • TomP says:

        Steve, it’s good that you posted the original code, but what it shows a number of problems viewed from software design standpoint. The main problem is that there is no real way of auditing the results without debugging it line by line. A much better approach would be to use an SQL query, which can be easily audited and changed if needed. Looking at the c++ code, you appear to be doing data validation to eliminate outliers, but there’s no explanation of what is being discarded or why.
        However, I can see a much more serious problem from the point of view of the data analysis. You have chosen a set of weather stations which are extremely unevenly distributed across the United States. The top states in your list, in terms of stations per square mile are Delaware, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland – 43 stations scattered over 32,147 square miles. At the bottom of the list are Nevada, with 9 stations scattered over 110,560 square miles, and Texas with 46 stations over 267,256 square miles. If you are simply averaging the data from all these stations, which is what you appear to doing, then you are implicitly saying that the data from tiny states like DE, NJ, MA and MD are around ten times more significant than the data from Nevada or Texas. In your analysis the 20 largest states in the country, which also just happen to lie in the West, have the lowest number of weather stations per square mile. It’s just possible that you are adjusting the weighting to account for the differences in density, but if so, I can’t see how you are doing it.

        • I’ve run the code on the fully adjusted NOAA data. and get exactly the same trend they do. Gridding affects the offset, but apparently has no effect on the slope – which is all that I care about.

    • phodges says:

      BEST also shows RAW

      http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/stations/33141

      That is a specific station…just paste a station number from the list above into the search box and you will get that station in the search results.

  40. Not Chicken Little says:

    But remember – weather is NOT climate! Except when it can be used to reinforce the “gullible warming” meme…or theme…or scam. So this cold does not count – but a single “extreme” storm can and does mean the sky is falling! Or anything else for that matter, whether it be a flood or a drought or locusts or hail or damn near anything…

  41. Climatologists -glorified weathermen who know how to put garbage in and get garbage out. The computer modeling has been flawed for over a decade… so what to do??? Cherry pick the empirical data that fits your flawed model and deny there is anything wrong with the modeling…
    ohhh yea and definitely provide government funding only to like minded “scientists” with a similar agenda.

    NOAA and EPA two peas in a pod – accountable to no one except the alliance of the far left socialists and the wacko Soylent Green wackos. Hey maybe they can ask their #1 Global Warming expert what he thinks on which data is correct.. .you know .. the one who got all that money from the EPA who claimed he was on assignment from the CIA so he couldn’t be bothered to show up to work….

  42. “warmers” … what to do… ??? You “chicken littles” have been predicting the end of the world for almost 20 years now…. and low and behold… no one has drowned, the polar bears are making a comeback, the arctic polar ice is near record in the south and coming back strong in the north, the glaciers haven’t retreated, empirical data doesn’t support the modeling…..uh oohh…..

    Hey – here is an idea – quietly move the focus from MMGW to “Climate Change” and hope no one with a brain notices. Then declare victory using the low information/science challenged “journalists” as they make an equivalency between the two… it might work… all you need are few Hurricanes and you are on your way.

  43. Ed S says:

    Yeah, but that’s how global warming starts! First it’s hot, then it gets really cold, then there’s hardly any hurricanes… then REVOLUUUUTION!!!

  44. Jack State says:

    Since communism/fascism is now our friend the elite needed a new boogie man to make us tremble into submission and give them the fruits of our labor. The two pronged boogie man that can go on forever is climate change and the war on terror. It’s always about money and control of the masses.

  45. Jim Bob says:

    What is the “normal” temperature of planet earth in December?

  46. FutureUser says:

    If melting icecaps cause sea levels to rise, why doesn’t record icecap growth cause sea levels to fall? Because…. melting sea ice does not affect ocean levels, since melted ice (water) occupies the same amount of space in the ocean, as floating ice does.

  47. davoho says:

    “it’s bush’s fault” – BHO et al

  48. Dave-0 says:

    Gives new meaning to the “hockey stick” graph.

  49. Malik Nidal says:

    There are still some who will deny that global warming is a hoax.

  50. Jake says:

    How is it that the warmers have not joined forces with the gays to have this evil site shut down?
    How dare you present this data to the public before it can be scrutinized and approved.

  51. Hey, Mike Mann! I got yer hockey sticks for ya. Right HERE!

  52. Earl Murphy says:

    Cooling? see Sunspots, we worry about this cliamte stuff like the world is ending, when in reality we ignore that we are going bankrupt and headed for a depression, but we in the govt ignore that.

  53. dp says:

    Better leave this as a sticky for a few days – you’ve been Drudged.

  54. Scott says:

    I suspect this is all mankind’s fault due to solar depletion from overuse of solar energy.

    • DaveGinOly says:

      I was wondering what that giant sucking sound was. I thought it was the NSA sucking up e-mails, but I think you may be right!

    • La Nel says:

      You mean you never noticed that the sun gets bigger every evening? I mean, look at all the daylight it has to suck up!

    • Dotcoman says:

      Yeah, the overuse of solar panels are causing us to experience “Peak Sol.’ Solar panels are sucking the sun dry!

      Notice, how last summer the sun was up and bright almost to 9 PM and now here in Dec its barely able to light the sky at 4 PM. That’s proof right there I tell ya.

      Note: I am just using Mann/Gore logic

    • tom0mason says:

      Absolutely!
      The Greenies say it’s a sustainable source of energy but where are we going to find another when we’ve suck all the energy out of this one?

  55. ookie oh says:

    Please don’t confuse these people with facts, they can’t handle it.

  56. Forget the gays, poster Jakebutt. Why hasn’t anyone shut down the born out of wedlock Kenyan mulatto in the WH. That is the genuine issue facing the American ppl, not gays.

  57. fartman says:

    Dork people..it finishes the year cold

    • Realdan says:

      colder than it has in many years, Warmonger. If they were having barbecues and water skiing in Boise due to record high temperatures, you would be screaming it from the rooftops.
      The real deniers are those like you. The reality, your AGW fairy tale has been thoroughly discredited.

  58. moonmac says:

    Global Warming is just another scam by money manipulating elites to steal billions more from the productive working classes while they consume 50 times the energy as the Average American.

    • Paul B. says:

      You hit the nail on the head. We can’t drive our SUV’s without the Pres. and Al Gore trying to make us feel guilty all the while they are flying in private jets on a daily basis. Anywhere there’s money to be made off of the sweaty backs of american working people, be sure they will be there demanding it.

    • tom0mason says:

      And rob the future from your children and grandchildren.

  59. Dave says:

    omfg its global warming aaaahhhh

  60. Bob Wise says:

    The trouble is that you are dealing with a gullible public who only listen to sound bites from charlatans like Al. Gore and his Democratic henchmen. Any REAL climatologist will tell you that this so called warming cycle is a natural phenomena and has been going on for thousands of years. We maybe getting warmer, although some signs say to the contrary, but my understanding is that we are in one of the 500 year cycles where the climate gets warmer because of other forces outside our orbit e.g. the Sun !!

    • Actually, 97% of Climatologists will tell you the warming is real and largely man-made.

      http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html

      • Actually, that article and statistic is complete bullshit.

      • “Actually”, that article is 5 years old………back when the warmists and their sheep were still in full denial that their “science” was bull caca.

      • Joseph says:

        you do realize that article is 4 years old any information from that must sound of the faults

      • Seems many of the warming believers are filled with hot air.

        These true believers see a fiery apocalyptic ending to mankind unless we repent and believe the gospel of warming. I guess brother Gore is the pope of their faith. If you fall short and doubt even for a minute he can pardon your sin through the sale of indulgences, opps I mean carbon credits.

        There I go being critical of brother Al G.

        All while his snake oil, opps, I mean carbon credits have successfully done one thing, ……………………….made him rich…………………………..

      • Realdan says:

        Why don’t you quote MSNBC and Huff and Puff too, other arms of the Obama admin.

      • tom0mason says:

        Actually, 97% of Climatologists –
        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
        That old fake theory! Get real.

      • Dotcoman says:

        Oh, I see you still don’t understand that reaching a “consensus” is not scientific.
        It’s also a fallacy and cheap debate tactic most often employed by the Left.

    • Wowzers says:

      You have obviously never spoken with a climatologist. 97% think you are crazy and dangerous to humanity.

      • I speak with climatologists almost every day, and they think that uneducated catastrophists like you are a crazy and dangerous to humanity.

      • gator69 says:

        God leftists are gullible! :lol:

        “An invitation to participate in the survey was sent to 10,257 Earth scientists…. In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2.”

        And here were the questions asked:

        1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
        2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

        Significant can be 10%. Note that there was no opportunity in the survey (which was not subject to peer, or any other review, which explains its blatant flaws) to quantify or even discuss what part natural variability had to play. They sent out 10,257 surveys, received 3146 replies (seems that most Earth scientists were not even concerned enough to reply), and used only 79 to come up with a 97% consensus that the Earth has warmed since the Little Ice Age, and man may have been a minor contributor. By their ‘figuring’ that means that 2.5% of those who responded to the survey agree the Earth has warmed. EARTH SHATTERING!!! :lol:

        This is the sort of manipulation that warmists use to fool the public into thinking we have a problem. Truth be told, I would answer ‘yes’ to question 1, and ‘maybe’ to question 2.

        If you do not understand that you have been duped by the grantologists, have a very nice bridge for sale, and 97% of bridge experts say you should buy it.

  61. JMitch says:

    Now they call it Climate Change. What a revelation! The climate always changes from hot house to ice age. It’s been going on for millions of years! The biggest hoax is believing government can do anything about it. In the end, they will probably get their carbon tax approved and further restrictions and control of our economy and the climate will continue to cycle between hot and cold periods.

  62. John A. Harnes says:

    It does not matter what the actual figures are, the UN and global warming advocates will still claim it is one of the hottest years on record.

  63. bobs says:

    Let’s all assume that some post on a personal blog is the last word in science and then make a bunch of hateful comments!

  64. dsaD says:

    Global warming and cooling (climate change) has been going on since the beginning of time. If climate change is caused by humans then it has to be caused by human POPULATION GROWTH. If that’s the case, then the cause of the problem (overpopulation) should be addressed rather than the symptoms (climate change).

    On a related note, no one has answered my question after 10 years of asking, “What cause the global warming that melted off the great Ice Age when man was hardly present on the planet?” Answer: The global warming that ended the ice age was part of the NATURAL CYCLING of climate that has gone on since the beginning of time and always will.

    The only people that don’t understand this are idiots, liars, or people like liberals who have mental disorders and are incapable of common sense reasoning or rational thought.

    • *******
      “What cause the global warming that melted off the great Ice Age when man was hardly present on the planet?” Answer: The global warming that ended the ice age was part of the NATURAL CYCLING of climate that has gone on since the beginning of time and always will.
      ********

      I have repeatedly asked this very question myself and all I hear are crickets….

    • R.A. says:

      Atlanteans built too many windmills near the glacial walls. The combined noise of all those turbines developed a resonant response in the crystalline structure of the ice sheet that built up energy slowly at first, then faster and faster(if you graphed the buildup, the line would probably resemble a hockey stick), until finally the entire Laurentide sheet shattered violently, setting off a chain reaction of quakes, vulcanism, tsunamis, torrential rains, large boats filled with animals, dead megafauna, and lost civilizations.

    • Peter from Mesa says:

      I saw a nature/archaeology show on PBS a few months ago about a thriving society in what is now the middle of the Sahara Desert, complete with crop land and plentiful water. PBS neglected to mention what kind of SUVs those people drove to heat up the planet and expand the desert…

  65. Oakie Wilson says:

    Here’s the real lie. Now think about it.

    Issued back in early November:

    “WARSAW, Nov 13 (Reuters) –

    “This year is the seventh warmest since records began in 1850 with a trend to weather extremes and the impact of storms such as Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines aggravated by rising sea levels, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said on Wednesday.”

    Get that? With the coldest months of the year yet to come?

    The “science” was already “settled”, apparently, why wait for confirmation data?

    But the teachers who pin this to the wall in classroom, know no kid would dare to question the world’s authority.

    • The “coldest” month of the year is irrelevant. If a “normal” December temperature in a certain city is 22 degrees…and it ends up being 29 degrees, that’s MUCH warmer than normal. Its all relative.

      • gator69 says:

        Hey Lea! Where my house sits, there was once an ice sheet a mile thick, and now there isn’t. What is the ‘normal’ December temperature for my backyard?

        The scientifically illiterate do not know that there is no ‘normal’ when it comes to climate and weather. All we have for temperatures are averages over an insignificant period of time. Climate change is indeed real, but it is also perfectly ‘normal’.

      • tom0mason says:

        So what really is relevant is the averaged, homogenized, temperatures from a few sites spread over 100 of square kilometers?
        The temperature you actually measure where you live is not correct because….?

  66. R. Finney says:

    Just think how cold it would be if we didn’t have global warming to counterbalance it!

  67. Stan says:

    It would have been warmer, had it not been colder…so my global warming neighbors tell me. LOL

    • tom0mason says:

      As an old Irish lady would say to me on cold days –
      “If it was twice as warm as it is half as cold you’d feel twice as hot as you are now!”

  68. Barack Obama says:

    Damn that Global Warming! Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa f-ing idiots.

  69. YOUGOTTOBEKIDDINGME says:

    The environmentalist want to use the global warming lie to choke off the use of carbon based fuels that all this is about.

  70. tonymarini says:

    Hey NOAA, just give us the raw data…we’ll draw our own conclusions, thank you!!!!

    Got it???

  71. Stache says:

    Global Warming alarmist (liars or ignorant) will pee down your back, and tell you it’s raining. By the way, I stocked up on a lifetime supply of incandescent bulbs so I never have to use those ugly, poisonous, over priced BS bulbs they try to shove down everyone’s throat. Still living the way I want to! Have a nice day commies!

  72. aeroguy48 says:

    Congrats Steve on the Drudge link, may it bring up riches and fame or, something.

  73. Main problem here is that the US only makes up less than 2% of the Earths surface. So this article has nothing to do with any GLOBAL Warming trend, although it tries to mislead people to that perception. When the other 98% of the Earths temperatures come in, it is likely to be much warmer. Wonder if Drudge will publish those findings when they come in? Answer is, only if it fits their denial agenda. OTW don’t expect to hear too much about it, or they’ll claim its some vast conspiracy by scientists (lol).

  74. Dave says:

    What kind of dumbass would believe a website over NASA? This information is not backed by anyone who even claims to be scientific. And nope, science is not about a bunch or people reacting to information they don’t like. Science is something which posits a theory, creates a methodology and presents a conclusion which can be verified by others. Do you people believe in Santa Clause too?

    • Those websites are evil.

    • tom0mason says:

      “Science is something which posits a theory, creates a methodology and presents a conclusion which can be verified by others.”
      What an excellent idea maybe the IPCC team can get around to doing things this way one day, then we could all go back to a quiet and peaceful live safe in the knowledge that the climate scam is over.

      Have a festering Christmas and a preposterous New Year. ;-)

    • david a says:

      What kind of fool would believe a vacuous theory which is unsupported by all the observations and data?

      • Jo Josephson says:

        Simple: a class of citizenry well-trained to subscribe to an ideology via public education, corporate owned media, Bain Capital controlled talk radio, institutions of lower living (aka, “academia”), and all control by private offshore banksters who are running the whole con.
        This is a segment of the populace who would rather plunge their heads into the sands of nonstop entertainment, TV, sports, video games, alcohol, drugs, consumerism, gossip, etc., all funded by the taxpayer and those foolish enough to support the Fortune 500 companies who lie to us, poison us, steal from us and hypnotize with the aforementioned items … anything to distract from the theft of our wealth and esp. our liberty.
        What is this social class called? “Sheeple”

    • james says:

      Well, NASA, as you certainly are aware, is an organization that has a goal to make believers in Islam feel comfortable. Has noting to do with climate research. And lately, not much to do with maned space exploration. That is the job of the Chinese.

    • james says:

      SO, what, exactly, would it take to disprove global warming? As you must be aware, a theory must be falsafiable to be a scientific theory.

    • Jo Josephson says:

      Obviously, you’ve never worked for NASA. I have many friends who are devastated at what NASA and NOAA has become. They should be called PropagaNASA.
      Look into “Climategate.” Here’s a primer: http://tinyurl.com/lpvtron
      (Try to use your scientific rational mind on this and remove all emotion from the source please.)
      Yes, there are dedicated scientists and engineers (though just a fraction of what there used to be) but the bureau-rats who have climbed the ladder are the ones who will say and do anything they are instructed to, and that includes lying about data to serve a political agenda.
      Anyone who thinks NASA is still just about science, then they need to slap themselves hard, wake-up and smell the coffee.

    • Teddi says:

      You mean like the theory of Co2 going up and taking temps along for the ride ?

      ..whoops, that theory has been disproven !

      • tom0mason says:

        It was not disproven as it was never validated.
        The prior theory of global temperatures varying due to natural cycles was never falsified, therefore the AGW theory was just a distraction. It stopped real scientist from looking for at the true science of climate.

    • Ron Reale says:

      “Science is something which posits a theory, creates a methodology and presents a conclusion which can be verified by others. ”
      Not Climate science! Neither Penn States Professor Mann or the liars at East Anglica in London had any of their research peer reviewed, or saved their research for others to recreate. You don’t have top believe in Santa Clause to know corruption when you see it, and Professor Hanson at NASA is as much a liar and fraud as the others.

    • “What kind of dumbass would believe a website over NASA?”
      Uhhm most posters here? Anyone who listens to Hush Bimbo and 700 Club nut-job Pat Robertson? Also all Tea Party members? And those who believe Columbus had it wrong and that the world is really flat.

      • It isn’t clear to me how USHCN temperature data ties in with Pat Robertson. Perhaps you could elaborate?

        • dashmooz says:

          Lea,

          Since you claim to believe in ‘science’ and are disregarding ‘websites’ instead of NASA, could you possibly explain to me what data you would need to see to start questioning ‘climate change’ as they describe it now? It seems to me that the following is true:

          1) The Climate Change lobby (i.e. – scientists invested in this theory) have a real, credible incentive to make you believe this theory is real. All of their scientific research is invested in this, all future grants and money is tied to more ‘studies’ of it, and if they are wrong after all of the abuse they have heaped onto people questioning their theory, they are completely finished as credible scientists.
          2) As global temperatures have not risen overall in the last 15 years, I think that it is alarming how the vaunted models that forecasted increases have been wrong in every case. How on earth are we supposed to trust climate model projections 100 years out when they can’t accurately forecast even short term temperature trends?
          3) I truly don’t think the global warming supporters realize how much money and resources it would take to even attempt to do what the global warming lobby wants on a global scale. It would consume trillions upon trillions of dollars to even begin to make a dent, IF (and only IF) this theory is true. Even IF it is true, adapting to it would cost far less than doing what they are proposing.
          4) The climate change lobby, if they are truly honest, should be 100% honest with the public about the effects of their proposals. Similarly to ObamaCare, they are lying about it. They lied about Obamacare and its impact on the average family (if you like your plan, you can keep it. Period). If they institute a carbon tax and do all the things they are proposing relative to ‘renewable energy’, the average family’s energy bill would triple or quadruple, easily. They are not telling people that because they know people would be instantly against it, so they have to LIE in order to get these radical bills passed before those people understand the details.

          Do you think retiring all coal plants is good for the country? Coal usage is down and still accounts for 40%+ of all electricity – where is that going to come from when Obama shuts down coal plants?
          And forget just your ‘electric’ bill – every product and every service will rise dramatically in price since their costs are going to triple, too. And so people can’t afford those products and will cut back – this increases poverty (as people get less goods and services for their money), and craters the economy (as businesses go under b/c their sales plummet). Oh – but wait – we got rid of that nasty coal energy!! We can breathe clean air while we starve!!!

      • Realdan says:

        What science did you take in school, pseudo?

        You would be surprised at the depth of study most climate realists, like myself, have undertaken, certainly far more than George Clooney, Mark Ruffalo, and the rest of the acting scientists polluting this world.

        Learn the scientific method, then maybe one day you will realize that Mann, and his henchmen are pure frauds

      • tom0mason says:

        Careful your projecting again, or are you to busy listening to the babblings of Sierra Club? That rich mans club.
        Or do you feel it’s bad of me to point this out?

      • Gamecock says:

        Columbus did have it wrong. Who you callin’ dumbass now?

      • rw says:

        Boy, push the right button and all the free associations come pouring out!

      • tom0mason says:

        Truly the nut-jobs are within you. As I’m sure you are aware most people believe in some deranged theory or other. Yours is obviously AGW, well know that you are in good company –

        “For what it’s worth, the Flat Earth Society doesn’t have an ‘official’ position on climate change. That falls a bit outside our remit,” Flat Earth Soceity President Daniel Shenton told Business Insider in an email from England.

        “Personally, though, I believe the evidence available does support the position that climate change is at least partially influenced by human industrialisation.”

        Yes the flat earth society, from the backward nation of England, is with you there.

        http://www.businessinsider.com/flat-earth-society-to-obama-climate-change-speech-georgetown-2013-6

    • FutureUser says:

      Peer Review has become Peer Pressure in a white lab coat.

  75. sc says:

    “PhysOrg.com) — Sunspot formation is triggered by a magnetic field, which scientists say is steadily declining. They predict that by 2016 there may be no remaining sunspots, and the sun may stay spotless for several decades. The last time the sunspots disappeared altogether was in the 17th and 18th century, and coincided with a lengthy cool period on the planet known as the Little Ice Age.”

    Read more at: http://phys.org/news203746768.html#jCp

  76. Bob White says:

    Considering the US is under 300 years old, how can such a short record be indicative of anything?

  77. Liberals are having a lot of trouble with their credibility. Everything they say is proven wrong.

    • jeff says:

      Not proven wrong, whatever you have, wherever you got it, it’s from big oil or a conservative zillionaire. No warming 15yrs? Oh we only use 30 year cycles. Everything has a rebuttal however ridiculous. We might be screwed, no matter what, they twist it around

    • rw says:

      I’ve come to the conclusion that this may be some kind of occult principle. That’s one reason I’m concerned about their continued insistence on catastrophic warming – especially if the principle is quantitative (intensive) rather than just binary.

  78. Dave Morris says:

    Just sitting here waiting for the Coronal Mass Ejection. The great equalizer.

  79. jim h says:

    I love it someone finally posted the weather station sites ,go find them in your town. Rolla mo. site sits in the middle of a parking lot surrounded by buildings and roads. It should not be used in any average . It will always be warmer . What were stations surrounded by in !920 Probably cows and grass, yet the data is averaged like there is no difference. Over 50% of stations in the usa are compromised in this way. Buildings, roads, airports have surrounded these stations and have driven up the averages yet noaa and govt. scientist refuse to recognize this in their data Why? Because It would erase 20 years of the biggest lie ever told to the world. There is no warming and carbon can’t cause something that is not happening. Unless we trully live in la la land.

  80. rufedup2 says:

    My, my… now this really is an “Inconvenient Truth”. Don’t ya’ think Al?

  81. ed says:

    What did someone say 1,000’s of years ago when the ice that gouged out the great lakes melted and left us with the Great Lakes?
    Yes. ice been melting for long time. But I do prefer it warmer!
    In parts of Canada they imposed a .11 cent a gallon global warming tax on gasoline!

    What a scam!

  82. Harry Ball says:

    More libtard delusions exposed as lies.

  83. talldave2 says:

    Grats on the Drudge link, glad more people are seeing your work.

  84. WinstonSmith says:

    More proof of global warming.

  85. Billy Bob says:

    How many years does a trend have to continue before it is not considered an anomaly?

  86. Seems many of the global warming faith are filled with the hot air they warn us about. If they would just keep their mouths closed the problem goes away.

    But instead……………

    These true believers see a fiery apocalyptic ending to mankind unless we repent and believe the gospel of warming. With brother Albert presiding as Pope and high priest of the true believers. Who if you doubt and fall short, can pardon your sin of unbelief, through the sale of indulgences, opps I mean carbon credits.

    Seriously though, his snake oil, opps, I mean carbon credits have successfully done one thing, …..….……………………….made him rich…………………………..

    So he can fly all over the world creating a huge carbon footprint warning all the heathen unbelieving masses of the impending doom if they fail to repent and believe his gospel.

    Its Man/bear/pig all over again (See South Park episode for details of Al Gore vs man/bear/big)

    Who btw is half man, half bear, and half pig!

    Really, I’m serial ( :

  87. leishman says:

    Here’s the perfect question (and follow-up) to pose to an AGW believer:
    Me: So, tell me, WHAT is the ideal temperature of the planet? Please pick a number of degrees warmer or cooler than our present temperature.
    AGWman: Well, it’s not just one number, it’s a range.
    Me: OK, what range?
    I’ve posed this question a dozen times, and have yet to hear an intelligent answer. Follow-up questions to AGWman ask whether the last Ice Age temp, the temp during Roman times (hotter than our present), the Medieval Warm Period, or the Little Ice Age represented the “ideal” temperature of the planet. After that, AGWman is usually just left with epithets, invective, ad hominem attacks, or appeal to “authority” such as the UN documents.

    • I’ve had a very smart guy (a good software developer) explain to me patiently that the degrees of warming today are worse than the degrees back when Greenland got its name. Apparently current degrees are motivated by evil humans, back in the day, they weren’t. I walked away from the discussion at that point.

    • Sid says:

      Here’s another great question for AGWman. What % of the variation in global temperature is accounted for by CO2? You will never get an answer to this question. They don’t report these kinds of statistics. Why? Their models don’t fit the data. Take a look at the temperature plot in this article and you will get a pretty good idea of the global temperature variation. Most of the variation in temperature couldn’t possibly be accounted for by CO2 which has been showing a DC increase with a cyclical sinusoidal pattern for years.

  88. CarolinaCowboy says:

    This is a rebuttal to NASA claimed evidence of man made global warming:

    NASA Posting Found here.
    Evidence:

    Climate change: How do we know?

    Seratom:
    So what if the co2 level is the highest that it has ever been it is still less than 0.04% of the total atmosphere and only 0.4% of the total greenhouse gases of which 95% is made up of water vapors. Humans only contribute about 3%-4% of that .04%. Do you know what part of .4 is of .04 is? .016 of .4, not of the atmustmphear, but of the co2 going into it.

    Go here to read the rest of the post: http://carolinacowboy.wordpress.com/2013/11/26/rebuttal-to-nasa-claimed-evidence-of-man-made-global-warming/

  89. Lou Mc Bride says:

    Ten years ago USA temperature records pre-1880 were available on the net….why have they disappeared?
    North Pole Ice now at 1923 levels. Seldom mentioned, Why.
    Many scientific warming advocates question relationship to CO2, but such questions cut off the availability of grant money. Some science.

  90. Ken Towe says:

    Steve…. If this December in the US 48 states is just average (~33.0°F), the full year will average 52.6°F. That is not even in the top 50 coldest. However, the winter trend since 1998 (like the annual trend) is still down.

    • What are you using as the data source? I’m using the measured, untampered GHCN HCN data.

      US temps are running far below normal in December.

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve… I’m using the NCDC’s database which anyone can access at their “Climate at a Glance” page. December is running colder than average, but even if one uses the coldest US December on record (1993), 2013 will not be among the coldest. You need to show us your untampered full annual data. I think you’ve made a mistake here.

        • Did you actually read my article before commenting? NCDC data is massively tampered with. The link to the raw data is in the article.

        • Ken Towe says:

          Steve, Show us the actual NCDC December data, please. The tampered versus untampered. The use of the word “tamper” implies some sort of deliberate conspiracy. And what leads you to believe that untampered data are the “truth” and are better anyhow? Where does one go to find the raw, untampered data?

        • You apparently are not comprehending anything I am saying. The link to the raw temperature data is posted in the article above.

          Why doesn’t NOAA mention their massive alterations (two degrees relative shift) in their press releases? What they are doing is obscene

      • Ken Towe says:

        The NCDC data, JAN-DEC are immediately available to anyone at drd964x.tmpst. Here are the December averages since the year 2000… Where are “untampered” values for comparison? What is normal for December, untampered of course?
        2000 28.2
        2001 36.25
        2002 35.24
        2003 35.47
        2004 35.07
        2005 32.56
        2006 36.47
        2007 33.38
        2008 31.88
        2009 29.55
        2010 32.47
        2011 35.3
        2012 36.27
        2013 -99.9

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve… What is your source for these untampered temperatures? And, how do you know they are untampered? This is certainly important, if true. NCDC has adjusted older US Weather Bureau values, but those go back before ~1983 and the reasons have been explained. No conspiracy.

      • Ken Towe says:

        Here are links to full explanations for the NCDC data…

        http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/

        http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/about-ncdc

        In January we will find out if 2013 was one of the top 10 coldest or whether it was even in the top 30. If true, I’m sure that the media will be all over it.

        In the US-48 no individual state has experienced a record low year since Nebraska did in 1993… a decade without a single record year. Record high years? In 2012 there were 19 states, unprecedented? Winters are getting colder… the trend since 1998 has been down.

        • The actual adjustments they make are much larger than their documentation

          Should I repeat that a few more times, or just wait until you don’t bother to read it again?

      • Ken Towe says:

        No need to repeat yourself, Steve. If what you say is indeed true it will be reported elsewhere…for sure. BTW, Have you ever asked anyone up at NCDC’s center in North Carolina to explain why don’t just give us the “real” data?

        • I’ve got the real data – it is available on the NOAA website. As far as I know, awareness of this tampering is just starting to become publicly known.

        • Ken Towe says:

          Steve… So when you spoke to someone at NCDC’s Asheville, NC center about your findings, what did they say? I’ve spoken to several of them in the past about data inconsistencies. They usually have pretty good explanations, even if I didn’t necessarily agree.

        • Glad you like their adjustments

        • Ken Towe says:

          Steve…You’re lack of a direct response to my question about contacting NCDC is very telling. You apparently have no real scientific interest in finding out why the NCDC data have been, in your repeated words, tampered with. If your tempering assertions and conclusions about them are indeed accurate the fact that you tried to make a serious effort to learn would certainly help your case. As it is, your avoidance makes you look weak… all of your charts, “bells-and-whistles” notwithstanding. In this respect, you seem to be a “paper tiger”.

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve… going back to your nifty charts (12/21 7:10 PM) showing the trend differences between the 2009 and 2013 temperatures, I just noticed that none of them is your GHCN HCN data. It is all GISS data…Jim Hansen’s data. Bad form to tell us one thing about your data, but slip in somebody else’s rendition. I don’t doubt that the data, everyone’s, has been changed, for good reasons, but you need to explain why you haven’t contacted either GISS or NCDC for their explanation.

  91. TRG says:

    Why are older temperature adjusted downward? I would expect most temperature errors to be due to siting issues which would cause temperatures to be higher not lower.

    • Ken Towe says:

      TRG… A good question. The older temperatures have been adjusted downward by about 0.7-0.8°F. The so-called urban heat effect, which is real, irrespective of siting issues, would seem to be more intense with time and the newer values would intuitively be higher, especially near high population areas.

      • Older temperatures have been adjusted downwards by 1.0 to 1.7F. Look at the graph in the article.

        • Ken Towe says:

          That has nothing to do with answering TRG’s question. But, please provide a source for your 1921, 1934 monthly temperatures, all 48 states, to document that assertion. Is it the old US Weather Bureau? They published their values every month, for every state.

  92. bartman says:

    What did it for me years ago was visiting the glacier fields of Alberta Canada. Seeing that the decade markers showed a receding glacier before 1910, which was before the industrial revolution, convinced me that the natural earth cycles far swamp the human contributions.

    • Gamecock says:

      I know what you mean, but check your terminology. The industrial revolution was late 18th century to mid-nineteenth century.

      • bartman says:

        The true smokestack industrials were in their infancy (dirty but low total quantitative output based on relatively small populations) as we entered the 20th century, and the automobile was just being invented — both prime targets of the global warming crowd.

        Some of our sustained coldest weather occurred before 1920, yet glaciers were receding. Unless someone can prove to me that the latency of industrial output effects in our atmosphere takes 75-100 years to be noticed (i.e., post 1920), I remain a skeptic. BTW, the effects of a single large volcanic eruption is felt within a year.

  93. cyberdous says:

    As a people, we need to be better at remediating our waste so it does not have a negative impact on our soil, oceans, animals, plants, etc – we all live in one, giant biosphere that is highly interconnected.

    If this ‘global warming’ / ‘climate change’ debate accomplishes anything, it should get folks on both the political right AND left to see that humanity makes a HUGE impact on everything around us. We all need to be more responsible. Period.

  94. iambicpentamaster says:

    Brrr…

    Surely is cold these days.

    Here’s some science for all y’all…

    Step One: Place drink carefully on solid, stable, flat surface away from all electronic devices and outlets.

    Step Two: Google “Al Gore adductors release second chakra”

    Step Three: View first few results returned from search engine.

    Step Four: Click one of the top two or three links.

    Step Five: Allow merriment to ensue.

    Step Six: Thank me for Step One.

  95. K. McNamara says:

    All these freezing temperatures are simply proof of global warming. There is no longer any condition that doesn’t confirm anthropogenic global warming.

    Too hot? Global warming.
    Too cold? Global warming
    Too wet? Global warming
    Too dry? Global warming

    It’s no wonder they’ve started referring to it as “climate change” since people were no longer believing their nonsense. Talk about overplaying your hand.

  96. Jim Brown says:

    What amazes me, is the fact that when Phil Jones at East Anglia University was forced by British courts to release the raw temp data used to make their computer models, it was noted by a well known statiscian, McKitrick or McEntyre I believe was the name, noted that when comparing the raw data with the adjusted data, i.e. those used for the climate models, every temperature adjustment was in an upward direction. Other statiscians whom have looked at this claim that these adjustments all being in the same direction are a statistical impossibility and likely are the result of scientific fraud.

  97. Tom Roberts says:

    How many times does a ranting Dumbofuc Party member have to rant at you about Global “Warming” before you agree to give over all means of production to the Dumbofuc Party????
    How many times????

    • Greg says:

      We can’t have an environmental dictatorship without global warming. Wake up people the earth is about to burst into flames if you do not bend knee to the Dumbo’s

  98. gerry d welder says:

    youtube: The IPCC Exposed

    By the Corbett report

    Many so called IPCC ‘top’ scientists are “still 10 years away from a PHD”.

    With now all the exposed fraudulent papers, illegally withholding data, admitted manipulated studies and admissions of scientists lying, perhaps the ‘Warmists’ are the real ‘Deniers’.

    Who are the hysteric alarmists?

    youtube:

    The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie ” The club of Rome…

    Now Rothschilds bought a weather broadcasting network (gee, I wonder why??? DUH), Google it:

    EL Rothschild buys stake in Weather Central – FT.com

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/67ee5828-2d8d-11e0-8f53-00144feab49a.html

    Related:

    The ideological basis for ‘environmentalism’

    Exposed -WWF & Prince Philip – The World Wildlife Fund

    Published on Nov 23, 2013

  99. My typical arguments go something like this…Them: “Well, where is all of the CO2 going then?”…Me: “The same place it went the last time the CO2 levels were high”…Them: “If it’s going into the ocean then we’ll have acidification and we’ll have no more seafood”…Me: “Why did the ocean recover from the last time CO2 levels were high?”…*grunting and groaning sounds*…Them: “You just love the Koch brothers and fossil fuel and…”…Me: “I just love everyone having a chance at a decent life, and cheap energy helps to provide that chance”…Them: “What happens when we run out then?”…Me: “That’s why you guys have about 200-300 years to figure that out, not trying to force something on us now that’s not ready”…and on, and on…

    • Jodie Johansson says:

      There are ways to add chemicals to de-acidify the ocean, and cutting trees down near the N. Pole would lower the temps. But, the lefties don’t want to “solve” the problem, they want to control people’s behavior.

  100. Paul B. says:

    I wish global warming were true. We could all live in the tropics and never shovel snow again! Yeah! Too bad it’s not true though.

  101. Fitshoeman says:

    What about the world climate?

  102. Fitshoeman says:

    Of all the planets in our solar system, Venus is the hottest one, even hotter than Mercury, the planet closest to the sun. Venus, whose daytime temperature can reach 900 degrees Fahrenheit (464 degrees Celsius), is surrounded by a thick gaseous layer that consists mostly of carbon dioxide. When the sun’s rays reach Venus, the carbon dioxide traps the heat within, causing a kind of planetary greenhouse effect. With its noxious carbon dioxide gas, its roaring temperatures and its fierce winds that storm across its surface, Venus is understandably known as one of the most inhospitable planets.

    http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/venus-hottest-planet

    • gator69 says:

      Venus is hot because of its extremely high atmospheric pressure and its proximity to the Sun.

      • Proximity to the sun does not have much of a direct effect on temperatures, because a thick cloud layer in the upper atmosphere reflects most of the sunlight back into space. The only important factor affecting Venus temperature is the atmospheric pressure.

  103. Jodie Johansson says:

    Does anyone know Al Gore’s email address? I have an article I’d like to forward to him.

  104. JS says:

    The earth is billions of years old, and the climate data we have is at best is accurate for 150 years. So the information used to determine “manmade global warming” is about the same as going to a street corner and asking 10 people if they feel hot, then basing your study on the world climate on the opinion of those 10 people. It’s a shame that this was ever considered “science”.

  105. Bill says:

    The demoRAT-COMMUNIST party will ignore hard data…. full steam ahead. What is important is taking our money and our freedoms in the name of Progress.

  106. Hey. Mikey Mann! I got yer hockey sticks fer ya, right HERE!

  107. Noir says:

    Enough with the sensationalist headlines! It reads one of the coldest years in US History, yet the first paragraph of the article says since 1895. SO, are you stupid or something? The US has been here since 1776, dimwits.

  108. Dashmooz, stevengoddard,, and others. I hear many theories that are built on false assumptions.
    1) “Global warming stopped 15 years ago”: This is a laughable claim. 1998 had the warmest “El Nino in 100 yrs, and that vast ocean warming shot temps so high, that the next few years might have been slightly lower, but still warmer than any year pre mid 1990’s. And 2005 and 2010 were warmer than 1998. Another thing you have to look at are the “cold year (trough) trends as even the cooler years post 2000 are warmer than the 120 years before. Thats why the decade of 2000-2010 was the warmest on record, blowing away and bugus claim that warming ended in 1998. See chart on this link and get back to me,

    • gator69 says:

      I thought you had an issue with bloggers. :lol:

      So glad that you admit natural fluctuations like El Niño are responsible for climate changes.

      Class dismissed!

      • You got it wrong. Its the natural fluctuation of Warm (El Nino) followed the next year by Cold (La Nina) created a brief 2-3 year downtrend which many denialists, thirsting for a nugget, latched onto in order to say “warming ended”. But then 10 more years of the warmest temps on record blew that bogus claim away, but some blindly continue to repeat it. Now class is dismissed. :)

      • Earl Murphy says:

        Sunspots create an El Nino right?

        • gator69 says:

          There is correlation of El Niño and sunspots, but unlike the warmists, we know that correlation does not necessarily mean causation. Anyone who has made sun tea, or been to the pool on a cloudy day knows that the Sun, and not CO2, warms water.

    • tom0mason says:

      And what in any of these variations is not natural, where’s the proof that these are not natural.

    • alpha2actual says:

      Woodfortrees.org, hosted by a practical environmentalist Brit, has all of the pertinent climate related datasets and an interactive feature with many tools to plot data. The two satillite datasets clearly indicate that the temperature, globally, have been flat for the past 14 years. I recommend this site because I’m cynical and like to see the raw data, unadjusted, for myself. Warning, this site is extremely addictive.

  109. Roger Harper says:

    Al Gore and Jesse Jackson are both people that if they advocate anything I am 180 opposed. They are both frauds and posers.

  110. Another common “claim” by denialists is that the observed temperature data is artificially manipulated to show warming. One famous “skeptic” Dr Mueller, felt this way and did a lengthy investigation of past weather station data to prove his point. When Dr. Mueller finished, he instead concluded that the past data was indeed valid, and that the recent warming was indeed largely mane-made. Check out your “former” PhD skeptic turned believer:

    • tom0mason says:

      One famous “nonskeptic” Dr Mueller. There I fixed your mistake!

    • tom0mason says:

      Another common “claim” by warmists is that the observed temperature rise is artificially (mann-made) and now is warming. It’s actually just a natural cycle.

      fixed that one too.

      • There is no natural cycle in the past 150 years of modern climate data that mimics what is ongoing today. This might help explain it better:

        http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-natural-cycle.htm

        • gator69 says:

          Ah yes, that blogger again.

          “The Truth about Skeptical Science

          Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook. It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censoredwhile Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted andsmeared. The irony of the site’s oxymoronic name “Skeptical Science” is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions.

          John Cook is now desperately trying to cover up his background that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no prior employment history in academia or climate science.

          Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said,

          “I’m not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist” – John Cook, Skeptical Science

          A link from the Skeptical Science “About” page originally went to his cartoonist page,

          “John Cook: A cartoonist working from home in Brisbane, Australia” – SEV

          It is very important for Mr. Cook to keep up this facade, as once people learn of his lack of credentials and scientifically worthless employment history they are unlikely to take his website seriously no matter how he desperately pads his resume. As opposed to the highly credentialed climate scientists his staff harassed and censored;

          Patrick J. Michaels, A.B. Biological Sciences, University of Chicago (1971); S.M. Biology, University of Chicago (1975); Ph.D. Ecological Climatology, University of Wisconsin-Madison (1979); Research and Project Assistant, Center for Climatic Research, University of Wisconsin (1976-1979); Assistant Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1980-1986); Virginia State Climatologist (1980-2007); President, Central Virginia Chapter, American Meteorological Society (1986-1987); Executive Board, American Association of State Climatologists (1986-1989); Associate Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1986-1995); President, American Association of State Climatologists (1987-1988); Chair, Committee on Applied Climatology, American Meteorological Society (1988-1999); Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies, Cato Institute (1992-Present); Visiting Scientist, Marshall Institute (1996-Present); Member, American Association for the Advancement of Science; Member, Association of American Geographers; Member, Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society; Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1996-Present); Contributor and Expert Reviewer, IPCC (1990, 1992, 1995, 2001, 2007)

          Roger A. Pielke Sr., B.A. Mathematics, Towson State College (1968); M.S. Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University (1969); Ph.D. Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University (1973); Research Assistant, Pennsylvania State University (1968); National Science Foundation Trainee, Pennsylvania State University (1968-1971); Research Meteorologist, Experimental Meteorology Laboratory, NOAA (1971-1974); Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1974-1977); Distinguished Authorship Award, NOAA (1974); Leroy Meisinger Award, American Meteorological Society (1977); Associate Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1978-1981); Chief Editor, Monthly Weather Review (1981-1985); Fellow, American Meteorological Society (1982); Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University (1982-1985); Abell New Faculty Research and Graduate Program Award (1984); Deputy Director, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere (1985-1988); Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University (1985-2000), Abell Research Faculty Award (1987/1988); Researcher of the Year, Colorado State University Research Foundation (1993), Pennsylvania State Centennial Fellow (1996); Alumni of the Year, Pennsylvania State College of Earth and Mineral Sciences (1999); Colorado State Climatologist (1999-2006); Engineering Dean’s Council Award, Colorado State University (2000); Adjunct Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University (2003-2006); Fellow, American Geophysical Union (2004); Visiting Professor, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Arizona (2004); Senior Research Scientist, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado-Boulder (2005-Present); Senior Research Associate, Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado-Boulder (2005-Present); Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University (2007-Present)

          References:
          Refuting 104 Talking Points from Skeptical Science(PDF) (28pgs) (Lubos Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physics, March 29, 2010)
          Skepticalscience – Rewriting History (Shub Niggurath Climate, October 10, 2011)
          Roger Pielke Sr at the SS.com: A dark day in the climate science debate (Shub Niggurath Climate, September 18, 2011)
          Skepticalscience.com quote surgery on Pat Michaels(Shub Niggurath Climate, January 18, 2012)
          My Interactions With Skeptical Science – A Failed Attempt (So Far) For Constructive Dialog (Roger A. Pielke Sr., September 17, 2011)
          Final Comments On My Interaction With Skeptical Science (Roger A. Pielke Sr., September 21, 2011)
          Response To Skeptical Science On A Series Of Weblog Posts (Roger A. Pielke Sr., October 25, 2011)
          A Response to Skeptical Science’s “Patrick Michaels: Serial Deleter of Inconvenient Data” (Patrick J. Michaels, January 17, 2012)

          Update: In March of 2012, the climate alarmist website Skeptical Science had their forums “hacked”and the contents posted online. What was revealed is simply astonishing,

          Skeptical Science: The Censorship of Poptech
          “The impact of that ban on PopTech was to silence him.” – [Skeptical Science]
          Skeptical Science: “Ding dong, the witch is dead”
          “Conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart is dead at 43″ “Ding dong, the witch is dead…” – John Hartz [Skeptical Science], March 2, 2012
          Skeptical Science: “[W]e’re all a bunch of leftists”
          “It’s official, we’re all a bunch of leftists” – John Cook [Skeptical Science], August 26, 2011
          Skeptical Science: The Partnership with Al Gore
          “This morning, had a long skype call with a guy working with Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project. [...] He brought up the possibility of a partnership. [...] an exciting opportunity and another vindication of what we’re doing” – John Cook [Skeptical Science], September 27, 2011
          Skeptical Science: From Al Gore to Al Jazeera
          “Al Jazeera want[s] to feature SkS as the Site of the Week… Am sending them some info and pics now.” – John Cook [Skeptical Science], September 28, 2011
          Skeptical Science: Too Inaccurate for Joe Romm
          “Just got this email from Joe Romm: You must do more post vetting. More errors are creeping into posts and it will start making people like me wary of using them.” – John Cook [Skeptical Science], December 2, 2011
          Skeptical Science: “Drown Them Out”
          “Badgersouth [John Hartz] and I were just discussing the potential of setting up a coordinated “Crusher Crew” where we could pull our collective time and knowledge together in order to pounce on overly vocal deniers on various comments sections of blogs and news articles.” – Rob Honeycutt [Skeptical Science], February 11, 2011

          http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html?m=1

        • tom0mason says:

          I’m sorry have I missed some earth shattering research, oh, no, just someone referencing a blog.

        • tom0mason says:

          So where’s your proof, proof that manifestly shows with no doubt or error that mankind has to change its ways. That proof that will mean that all of our modern ways must be changed.

          Come on where?
          You want all to change their way of life, you better come up with more than a dumb blog site reference.

        • GlynnMhor says:

          One can clearly see a 60 year cyclicity in the data.

          Cooling from 1880-1910, from 1940-1970 alternating with warming from 1910-1940 and 1970-2000 makes for an obvious cycle.

          http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4.pdf

    • tom0mason says:

      Lastly –
      When Dr. Mueller finished, he concluded that the past data was indeed valid, and that the recent warming was indeed largely mane-made. And this confirmed what he had aways thought.

      Fixed.

      • Wong again: Damn you can’t hit the side of a barn with your come backs. Maybe you should stop throwing and re-calibrate.

        Dr. Mueller quote in NY Times July 2012:
        “Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

        Richard Muller’s admission has gained additional attention because some of his research has been funded by Charles Koch of the Koch brothers, the right-wing billionaires known for funding climate skeptic groups like the Heartland Institute.

        Anything else I can help clarify for you?

        • gator69 says:

          Math is hard! 2012-3=2009. 2003 is older than 2009.

          Class dismissed!

        • tom0mason says:

          Why have these people lied to you? And why have you accepted these lies?

        • rw says:

          The Koch brothers didn’t fund climate skeptics at the Heartland Institute. They funded some work on health care. Get your facts straight before you criticize others. Or are you unable to do anything other than glide with the currents of warmist mythology?

    • gator69 says:

      Ah yes, as Tom pointed out, the same Dr Mueller who lied about being a skeptic. Great source! What did the forger and document thief Peter Glieck have to say?

      Lea, please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any global climate changes. That should be easy. Right?

      • Gator,
        What “proof” do you have that Mueller lied about anything? That’s a strong assertion, Unless you have a CREDIBLE link, its just a baseless accusation, typical of denialists community.

        Back to your info you posted earlier, Skeptical Science is actually made up of a team of DOZENS of scientists who have degrees ranging from B.S. M.S or PhD’s, who in turn often gather quotes from other climatologists and use OFFICIAL temperature and other scientific data in their blogs. Nice try though trying to claim a cartoonist writes all that.(lol)

        http://www.skepticalscience.com/team.php

        Anything else I can help correct for you?

        • Reading John Cook is bad for your mental health

          December 17, 2003

          “Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.” –

          http://www.technologyreview.com/news/402357/medieval-global-warming/2/

          “It is ironic if some people treat me as a traitor, since I was never a skeptic — only a scientific skeptic,” he said in a recent email exchange with The Huffington Post. “Some people called me a skeptic because in my best-seller ‘Physics for Future Presidents’ I had drawn attention to the numerous scientific errors in the movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth.’ But I never felt that pointing out mistakes qualified me to be called a climate skeptic.”

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blackberry/p.html?id=1072419

        • gator69 says:

          Mullet said man made CO2 was causing global warming ten years ago, then last year he claimed to be a recently converted skeptic. Are you thick?

        • gator69 says:

          You can produce at least ONE peer reviewed paper that refuted natural variability, can’t you. I mean with all the climate experts at your disposal this should not be an issue. Right? So where is it?

          Class dismissed until you find proof of your ridiculous claims, missy.

    • Muller lied about being a skeptic. He said this 10 years ago

      December 17, 2003

      “Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.” –

      http://www.technologyreview.com/news/402357/medieval-global-warming/2/

      • Wrong.
        Read his NY Times article, His skepticism was just a little later mid 2000’s thru about 2009, which is why far right wing groups like Koch Industries and Heartland began funding him.

        • tom0mason says:

          Richard Muller has never been a skeptic, at best he had a moment of intellectual honesty towards skeptics when he acknowledged Steve McIntyre’s debunking of Mann’s Hockey Stick, only to later dismiss this as irrelevant to the global warming debate, “This result should not affect any of our thinking on global warming”. Hardly surprising, as Muller considers the carbon dioxide produced from burning fossil fuels to be, “the greatest pollutant in human history” and likely to have, “severe and detrimental effects on global climate”. The future outlook for global warming according to Muller is that, “it’s going to get much, much worse” and thus advocates that the United States immediately pay China and India hundreds of billions of dollars to cut back their carbon emissions or, “it’ll be too late”. No wonder he endorsed “The Earth is the Great Ship Titanic”, Steven Chu as “perfect” for U.S. Energy Secretary and Al Gore’s hypocritical alarmism,

          “If Al Gore reaches more people and convinces the world that global warming is real, even if he does it through exaggeration and distortion – which he does, but he’s very effective at it – then let him fly any plane he wants.” – Richard Muller, 2008

          “There is a consensus that global warming is real. …it’s going to get much, much worse.” – Richard Muller, 2008

          “Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.” – Richard Muller, 2003

          References:
          Medieval Global Warming (MIT Technology Review, December 17, 2003)
          Global Warming Bombshell (MIT Technology Review, October 15, 2004)
          Author and physicist Richard A. Muller chats with Grist about getting science back in the White House (Grist, October 7, 2008)
          Physics the Next President Needs to Know (Wired, November 2, 2008)
          Steven Chu named U.S. Energy Secretary (KGO-TV, December 15, 2008)
          Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines (Richard Muller, 2009)
          ‘In the Great Ship Titanic’ (The Daily Beast, April 10, 2009)
          Richard Muller, Climate Researcher, Navigates The Volatile Line Between Science And Skepticism (The Huffington Post, November 3, 2011)

          Update:
          Clarification on Koch Funding for Muller’s BEST project,
          “The research examined recent global surface temperature trends. It did not examine ocean temperature data or the cause of warming on our climate, as some have claimed” – Tonya Mullins, Director of Communications, Charles Koch Foundation

      • You should read the rest of the article. In most of it Mueller is criticizing the “hockey stick” research. From the same article just above that quote:

        “It was unfortunate that many scientists endorsed the hockey stick before it could be subjected to the tedious review of time. Ironically, it appears that these scientists skipped the vetting precisely because the results were so important. ”

        Next fly I can swat down for you?

    • Ken Towe says:

      Lea writes…”Another common “claim” by denialists is that the observed temperature data is artificially manipulated to show warming.”

      Indeed… and isn’t that what Mr. Goddard is just trying to do here on his blog? Or have I missed something? More significantly, Steve hasn’t contacted either NCDC or GISS to confirm his “thesis” that HIS analysis of THEIR data shows that it has been massively “tampered” = “manipulated” to show warming. Right or wrong, they have been convicted without a trial. How fair is that, regardless of your view on “climate change”?

      • Gamecock says:

        The data speaks for itself.

        • Ken Towe says:

          The data do speak for themselves, very clearly. 2013 will not be one of the coldest years, not even close, regardless of how cold December turns out to be.

        • gator69 says:

          Spoken like a true “believer”.

        • Ken Towe says:

          We will find out in a month about the full year. Gatorland’s coldest winter (DJF) was in 1958 (53.5°F). And in 2013 it was 62.8°F. Gamecock’s coldest winter was in 1976 (40.4°F) but this year “only” 49.3°F… Brrrrr.

        • gator69 says:

          Just where is ‘Gatorland’? Are you making assumptions again?

          I find it amusing that warmists always think they know it all.

        • Ken Towe says:

          Good for you Gator…that’s a very good point. Mr. Goddard doesn’t include the UHI either. Look at his long list of the USHCN stations above. Try to find a major city…. one where, of course, the data have been massively tampered with. Those “true believers” have tried to eliminate or reduce the UHI effect by “throwing out” high population center values. Of course, that “trick” doesn’t make the UHI go away. Why don’t you see if you can find some of that “lost” data?

        • gator69 says:

          Kent, I was a climatology student before data fraud was cool. If you have anything worth adding to the conversation please do so, if not, then quit wasting our time.

          This is how they warmed the globe, by eliminating stations at highs altitudes, higher latitudes, and rural locations, in favor of lower latitudes with higher population densities in marine influenced locations. Then they started cooling the past and warming the present. Even a fifth grader understands this.

        • Ken Towe says:

          “…in favor of lower latitudes with higher population densities in marine influenced locations.” Back in 1987 Hansen and Lebedeff wrote: “we also test the importance of urban heat island effects by selectively eliminating city stations from the analysis… A contradiction?

          Do any of the USCHN stations listed above fall into the category of higher population densities at lower latitude with marine influence? Miami, FL? Not there. Nor is New Orleans or Houston. Must be one somewhere.

        • gator69 says:

          Can’t see the forest for the trees? Maybe a geography course would help you.

  111. sammie says:

    it’s obvious.. lea just needs layed

  112. As usual these claims of Mueller were taken totally out of contest. Lets fill in the blanks,shall we?

    ” I would love to believe that the results of Mann et al. are correct, and that the last few years have been the warmest in a millennium. Love to believe? My own words make me shudder. They trigger my scientist’s instinct for caution.”

    He’s sarcastically saying he would love to believe Mann…BUT then writes why that would be wrong.

    Only someone being disingenuous, trying to spin things from the truth, would take that initial sarcasm from Mueller and twist it into him not being skeptical of Manns results.

    • gator69 says:

      Heros dies hard, don’t they Lea? It sucks finding out that someone you trusted lied to you. But don’t worry, when you mature a bit you will realize that it is better to question, than to simply accept.

      BTW, found that paper yet? Class will resume once you have

    • So when he said “I was never a skeptic” he meant he was always a skeptic.

  113. Regarding Matt Selby, here is a rebuttal (with graphics and reference links) that shows how incorrect Salby is regarding the Carbon Cycle.
    Murry Salby – Confused About The Carbon Cycle

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Murry-Salby-Confused-About-The-Carbon-Cycle.html

    Otherwise, Salby is a moot point. He was recently fired from his university for misconduct.(lol)

    “Our investigation revealed that the subject (Dr Salby), consistently and over a period of many years, violated or disregarded various federal and NSF award administration requirements, violated university policies related to conflicts and outside compensation, and repeatedly misled both NSF and the university as to material facts about his outside companies and other matters relating to NSF awards”

    http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/07/12/murry-salby-sacked-australian-university–banned-national-science-foundation

    Anything else?

    • gator69 says:

      Yep!

      “First and foremost, there is nothing in any of the NSF claims that questions Murry Salby’s scientific research. This is about paperwork and whether bureaucratic procedures have been properly followed, not about his science.

      There is another side to the story and a long and complex history regarding Murry Salby’s work at Colorado University (CU). It started way back in 1997 when he noticed funds were going missing from his NSF-funded research group. After requests for their return were ignored, he reported it to the NSF. By 2003 it reached the stage where the NSF launched a criminal investigation into Colorado University for misappropriation of research funds. The investigation stopped when $100,000 was returned to Salby’s group. Salby was unable to find out where half those missing funds had been placed during the time they had been missing. Possibly this did not make him friends at CU.

      Later after Salby left CU in 2008 to come to Australia, Colorado University withheld his computer files and work. After requests for those were also ignored, he launched a case from Australia, and won access to everything — CU paid legal costs as well. Curiously, soon after Salby launched that case, the NSF revived a dormant scientific investigation against Murry which went on to make some extremely serious claims — claims that Salby completely disputes (see his full letter).

      Salby had already moved to Australia when the NSF investigation was revived, so he could not apply for any more NSF grants. He explains that given the expense and distance, there was little point in launching a major legal protest to a debarment from funding that he was no longer eligible for in any case.

      Hyperbole and tenuous reasoning?

      At a glance, anyone reading the NSF report might come away thinking Salby “fabricated” time-sheets, a rather serious accusation. Yet on page 30 of the NSF document, even the Acting Deputy Director of the NSF admitted there was “insufficient evidence to support this allegation”.

      NSF Report, Deputy Director Cora B. Marrett, p 30

      The time and effort reports were a key point, mentioned more than 20 times, and referred to in dramatic language with words like “inaccurate”, “fabricated” and “fraudulent”. The allegation over the time sheets were described as “The most egregious act…” in the report. Other points also hinged on this point for which evidence was “insufficient”.

      The report even goes so far as to declare they were “separately created years after the fact”. How did such a serious and unsupported claim become written all through the final report?

      For the record, Salby notes that timesheets were filed years earlier by his administrative staff, who kept them on file and later invoiced his hours (see his Fig 2a and Fig 3). Salby wonders why the NSF did not pursue those records more diligently, and if the cumulative hours were so unbelievable why they found no fault when they were originally submitted.

      As for evidence, apparently the NSF report authors thought that Salby’s hours were “highly implausible”, saying that scientists would not work 14 -16 hours stretches for three months at a time. This may be true for administrators, but it is not necessarily so for scientists. Those hours are unusual, but not implausible for a dedicated researcher.

      One other major claim by the NSF was that Salby had submitted two proposals that overlapped. Apparently 53% of one proposal was identical to an earlier one (which didn’t get funding, so this was not about “extra income” or double dipping). I wouldn’t have thought it was that out-of-the-ordinary for submissions to reuse the reviews and references in similar research. Salby certainly feels the submissions were very different projects, and explains one concentrated on dynamics in the troposphere with meteorological data whereas the other concentrated on chemistry in the stratosphere with satellite data. Salby’s documentation shows that NSF officials had even been notified of the other proposal, which was to be considered for co-sponsorship (see Fig 1a and Fig 1b) Note in Fig 1a, the reviewers were very impressed with the proposal, which was knocked back on a technicality. Later, when it was resubmitted, the reviewers were critical of the NSF for wasting their time by not approving it the first time around. The NSF investigation began a couple of weeks after those criticisms).

      Some of the other claims with drastic terms include allegations of overcharging and compensation in excess of approved amounts. I gather this is because at one point a member of Salby’s team left. When no one else could be found, Salby filled in for the more junior staff member (and at lower pay rates) during leave from his CU employment (Fig 5 shows reduced CU employment during one such year). Salby evidently displeased the NSF by getting onto the job, and not seeking pre-approval. The NSF claim it was a reason for debarring him and say he was obligated to inform them. Salby replies that this was no different than the re-assignment of duties to other research staff, performed routinely to meet grant obligations. He notes also that NSF had in fact been informed every quarter, in regular expense reports (see Fig 6). Salby notes that the grant charges were unchanged from what had been budgeted. And, curiously, NASA operated under the same arrangements, yet had no such issues.

      This is not a bun-fight I want to get into, I’m more interested in the scientific research he is doing. But unskeptical activists are spinning what appears to be an unbalanced, inconsistent report to do what they do — attack the man, to distract us from his research. (If only DeSmog had scientific evidence they wouldn’t need to run the smear campaigns, would they?)

      Note that the NSF report, as “authoritative” as it appears on the surface, made a serious allegation that couldn’t even be supported. This was not a criminal investigation. There were no financial repercussions in the sense that there were no repayments involved, no changes to the grants being investigated, and no question that his scientific work did not measure up. Ultimately it boils down to paperwork and bureaucratese. That doesn’t mean Salby was a Saint, but I am surprized at the hyperbole used in the NSF investigation. To make repeated claims without evidence seems most untoward. It would appear that the author(s) were not approaching this calmly and dispassionately.

      Now, can we please get on with the science'”

      Now where is that paper missy? Why do you avoid the central question? Because you must.

      • rw says:

        Gator, you’re amazing. You know exactly how to handle these ATT’s (that’s airheads with talking points – unisex designation, of course). Notice how she never answers these detailed rebuttals, but just goes on to the next comment as if they were never made. That seems to be part of their MO – I recall that TowerOfCheese did the same thing when he was flitting around this site some time ago. It’s almost as if as long as they can keep up their palaver they see them selves as winning the debate.

        • gator69 says:

          Thanks for the kind words rw. I simply stand on the shoulders of giants.

          I have always been fascinated by this planet, and am especially enthralled with the massive forces that have altered its surface and climate, I would rather study the latest arguments and science regarding these processes than just about anything else. I do not spend time on sports, video games, American Idol or much of the other pastimes of my peers. I read alot, and always have. I have to give credit to the scientists whose work I have been fortunate enough to review, they are the really amazing folks.

          It has been noted that skeptics are generally more knowledgable about climate science, and this is because we are more receptive to alternate theories and more likely to ask questions and seek answers. Warmists just have nothing new to offer, it is always the same old tired story. The grantologists and puppeteers know this and this is why they either refuse to debate, or when they do, lose badly. The cheerleaders simply do not know that there is no science backing the wild rhetoric and foolishly stick their necks out. My only desire would be to see them ask honest questions, instead of taking every alarmist claim on blind faith.

          I ran across this quote later in life, not knowing I had already adopted as a child.

          “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”
          – Thomas Jefferson

          Words we should all live by, no matter our backgrounds or personal opinions. This credo has caused me to change core beliefs in the past, and made debate a cake walk. The truth WILL set you free.

  114. Tomomoson, Don’t get too hung up on Mueller not being as much of a redmeat skeptic as you would like. Reason is, there are very very few true climate scientists who are anymore…namely 3% (many of whom take Energy Industry $$ funneled from various sources).compared to 97% on the other side of the fence. For every legit Climatologist (not geologist or dentist) that you can name as a skeptic or more to the point, denialist, there are 30 who disagree. Thats about as one sided as it gets in scientific debate.
    The debate itself is over.
    You also need to get over it and stop reading just one side of the issue.

    • gator69 says:

      God leftists are gullible! :lol:

      “An invitation to participate in the survey was sent to 10,257 Earth scientists…. In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2.”

      And here were the questions asked:

      1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
      2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

      Significant can be 10%. Note that there was no opportunity in the survey (which was not subject to peer, or any other review, which explains its blatant flaws) to quantify or even discuss what part natural variability had to play. They sent out 10,257 surveys, received 3146 replies (seems that most Earth scientists were not even concerned enough to reply), and used only 79 to come up with a 97% consensus that the Earth has warmed since the Little Ice Age, and man may have been a minor contributor. By their ‘figuring’ that means that 2.5% of those who responded to the survey agree the Earth has warmed. EARTH SHATTERING!!! :lol:

      This is the sort of manipulation that warmists use to fool the public into thinking we have a problem. Truth be told, I would answer ‘yes’ to question 1, and ‘maybe’ to question 2.

      If you do not understand that you have been duped by the grantologists, I have a very nice bridge for sale, and 97% of bridge experts say you should buy it.

      • Uhm, I think the reason so many did not respond back was simply that they thought the debate was over, and weren’t going to answer an absurd question as to whether there is still a debate over AGW..

        Otherwise, the survey seems valid

        • gator69 says:

          No Lea, you don’t think. You ‘believe’.

          Found that paper yet? Or do you wish to further illustrate your religion?

        • rw says:

          “I think the reason so many did not respond back was …” That’s called unwarranted speculation. Always a reply, no matter how weak. Have to keep up the pretense that you know what you’re talking about.

          What they did with that survey was to whittle the group down until it only included the kool-aid drinkers. Then, surprise!, they got their 97%. And this allowed all the ATT’s to run with it. Unfortunately for the latter, bringing up that 97% figure demonstrates that one has no real ability to distinguish fact from fancy – and probably no real interest in doing so. Plato called it sophistry – which shows among other things that it’s been a burden on this “patient world” (H/T H. James) for a long, long time.

    • That proves it. The Arctic really is ice-free after all.

  115. Here you go Gator,
    From NOAA, via the National Ocean Service.
    “It is very unlikely that the 20th-century warming can be explained by natural causes. The late 20th century has been unusually warm. Palaeoclimatic reconstructions show that the second half of the 20th century was likely the warmest 50-year period in the Northern Hemisphere in the last 1300 years. This rapid warming is consistent with the scientific understanding of how the climate should respond to a rapid increase in greenhouse gases like that which has occurred over the past century, and the warming is inconsistent with the scientific understanding of how the climate should respond to natural external factors such as variability in solar output and volcanic activity.”
    More Here:

    http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/pd/climate/factsheets/canwarming.pdf

    • gator69 says:

      Gullible Lea strikes again! Upon what peer reviewed papers are these ridiculous claims based? I can claim that you are retarded, but without proper peer reviewed evidence, it would only be conjecture. Found that paper yet? Come on! You have 97% of the world’s greatest climate scientists as your resource. :lol:

      • kingbum says:

        wait…late 1800s didnt a little ice age end? Wouldnt that logically suggest a warming period? Now everything is cyclical in nature wouldn’t it suggest that since we have been at a perpetual uptick since 1880 that there will be a downturn? What goes up must come down….every action has an equal and opposite reaction….lol seems like all natural law is indicating its time for a downturn. ..remember now its cyclical meaning there is no up without a down…..and vice versa

    • tom0mason says:

      The denier in nature and it’s variability is back then.
      Have you managed to find a scientific paper yet that proves the global temperature and/or the CO2 level is outside natural bounds yet?

      No?

  116. Its an official gov’t publication from NOAA, chock-ful of PhD’s who specialize in Atmospheric research. But I’m sure you are more qualified than they are (lol) They seem to combine a lot of information from an IPCC report (Oh, that’s right, they’re all corrupt and you’re more knowledgeable than the IPCC as well). LMAO).

    They cited references from the bottom of their condensed product.

    IPCC, 2007:
    Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment
    Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
    [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt,
    M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

  117. Regarding that 4th IPCC report:

    People from over 130 countries contributed to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, which took 6 years to produce,included more than 2500 scientific expert reviewers, more than 800 contributing authors, and more than 450 lead authors.

    “Robust findings” of the Synthesis report include:

    “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level. Most of the global average warming over the past 50 years is “very likely” (greater than 90% probability, based on expert judgement)[ due to human activities.

    Basically NOT due to natural variation. And looking at either the NASA-GISS, NCDC or HADCRUT temps, its obvious something totally out of the norm has been going on for the past 30 years. Given that so many “skeptics”…I won’t even honor them with that term…lets just say “denialists” try to push tat warming ended in 1998 when the data and running mean trendlines clearly show otherwise, maes me wonder why anyone would want to listen to anything else they have to say. From what I’ve seen, most on the denialist side are either getting funded by Heartland, Koch Bros or any other front $$ launderer organization from the energy industry, or just perhaps a few disgruntled scientists who didn’t quite make the cut to get a University position and are relegated to the blogosphere.

    FYI…Before you go off on another IPCC attsck…the IPCC does NOT pay its scientists. They are a voluntary group, thousands of researchers who participate separate from their “day job”.. It does not get anymore “peer reviewed” than that.

    • tom0mason says:

      So we’re all going to fry eh? Because the IPCC says so. You are so gullible.

      Please could you find a a scientific paper yet?

      That’s still a no I see.

    • gator69 says:

      BS talking points.

      Where is the evidence?

      FYI – here is what real scientists say about the IPCC…

      “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

      “Temperature measurements show that the [climate model-predicted mid-troposphere] hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!”- UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.

      “I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,”Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007. – Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes.

      “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” – Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

      “The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil… I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” – South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

      “After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri’s asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it’s hard to remain quiet.” – Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society’s Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

      [Of the IPCC panel] “Here was a purely political body posing as a scientific institution. Through the power of patronage it rapidly attracted acolytes. Peer review soon rapidly evolved from the old style refereeing to a much more sinister imposition of The Censorship. As Wegman demonstrated, new circles of like-minded propagandists formed, acting as judge and jury for each other. Above all, they acted in concert to keep out alien and hostile opinion. ‘Peer review’ developed into a mantra that was picked up by political activists who clearly had no idea of the procedures of science or its learned societies. It became an imprimatur of political acceptability, whose absence was equivalent to placement on the proscribed list,” Dr. John Brignell, a UK Emeritus Engineering Professor at the University of Southampton who held the Chair in Industrial Instrumentation at Southampton

      Former UN IPCC scientist bluntly told the Senate EPW committee how the UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers “distorted” the scientists work. “I have found examples of a Summary saying precisely the opposite of what the scientists said,” South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

      “I am withdrawing [from the UN] because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns.” “I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound,”Hurricane expert Christopher W. Landsea of NOAA’s National Hurricane Center

      “The same individuals who are doing primary research in the role of humans on the climate system are then permitted to lead the [IPCC] assessment! There should be an outcry on this obvious conflict of interest, but to date either few recognize this conflict, or see that since the recommendations of the IPCC fit their policy and political agenda, they chose to ignore this conflict. In either case, scientific rigor has been sacrificed and poor policy and political decisions will inevitably follow,…We need recognition among the scientific community, the media, and policymakers that the IPCC process is obviously a real conflict of interest, and this has resulted in a significantly flawed report.” Former Colorado State Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr.

      “The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse. It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round…A large number of critical documents submitted at the 1995 U.N. conference in Madrid vanished without a trace. As a result, the discussion was one-sided and heavily biased, and the U.N. declared global warming to be a scientific fact.” Andrei Kapitsa, a Russian geographer and Antarctic ice core researcher

      “The science has, quite simply, gone awry. In fact, it’s not even science any more, it’s anti-science. There is absolutely no proof that carbon dioxide is anything to do with any impending catastrophe.” UK Botanist and ex-BBC broadcaster Dr. David Bellamy (who used to believe in man-made climate fears.)

      And this is the tip of the iceberg.

      Found even ONE paper that refutes NV?

  118. Those who degenerates to name calling basically admit defeat in an argument and are not worthy of serious debate.

    The IPCC report qualifies as a peer reviewed document. You might not like what they have to say, but I challenge you to find someone MORE QUALIFIED than those thousands of scientists on the IPCC who has a more compelling argument.

    Best you might come up with was a rouge doctor who got fired for misconduct or perhaps chain smoking skeptic Lindzen who also believes that there is no discernible link between smoking and lung cancer.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_S._Lindzen

    • gator69 says:

      Name calling? Who has been throwing around ‘denier’ and ‘denialist’?

      Please list the ‘thousands’ of scientists. Another BS talking point. Read and learn.

      “IPCC Criticism

      The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) officially released its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) in 2007. This document is often regarded as the definitive word on the science behind global warming. However, AR4 gives a distorted, misleading, biased and often erroneous picture. Examples of these distortions are listed here, with attention focused on the Working Group 1 Report “The Physical Science Basis” (WG1), and in particular its Summary for Policymakers (SPM). Curiously, the SPM was released in February 2007, several months before the main report. Confusingly, a “Synthesis Report” was issued in November 2007, with its own SPM. More background to the structure of the IPCC report is given here.

      Errors, Distortions and Exaggerations in the WGI Report

      How the IPCC invented a new calculus. The IPCC authors invented a new way of measuring the slope of a graph, in order to create the false impression that global warming is accelerating.
      The table that didn’t add up. The WG1 SPM was approved by the IPCC even though it contained a table with arithmetic errors. The table was quietly corrected with no admission of the error.
      False statement about Antarctic sea ice. The IPCC claims that there is no significant trends in Antarctic sea ice. In fact several papers (ignored by the IPCC) show a significant positive trend.
      Misleading claims about sea level rise. AR4 gives the misleading impression that the rate of sea level rise is increasing, using the trick of switching from one measurement system (tide gauges) to another (satellites).
      Incorrect calculation of an average. An arithmetic error was made in the calculation of an average of a contribution to radiative forcing. Hence four diagrams in AR4 are wrong and misleading.
      False claims about Antarctic ice sheet. The IPCC claims that the Antarctic ice sheet is melting and that this is contributing to sea level rise, but recent research papers show that in fact the ice sheet is thickening.
      Dubious claims about Greenland ice sheet. The IPCC claims that the Greenland ice sheet is melting and causing sea level to rise – ignoring or misrepresenting research that shows the opposite.
      Erroneous claims about snow cover. The IPCC makes the false claim that snow cover is decreasing in both hemispheres.
      Exaggerated claims about water vapour. The IPCC summary claims that water vapour has increased. In fact studies show no significant trend or in some cases a decrease.
      Misleading claims on increased tropical cyclone activity. The IPCC states that tropical cyclones have increased, by cherry-picking start dates, but their own data shows no evidence of this.
      The IPCC contradicts itself over the medieval warm period. The IPCC’s own data shows clear evidence that the medieval warm period was as warm as the late 20th century, but the text states the opposite.
      False statement about paleoclimate studies. The IPCC claims that there is increased confidence in proxy temperature reconstructions, but in fact the opposite is the case.
      Proxies that aren’t proxies. The IPCC makes use of ‘proxy’ data such as tree rings to justify their claim that current temperatures are unusual – but this data doesn’t match measured temperature.
      Downplaying the urban heat island effect. The IPCC significantly underestimates the influence of the fact that many temperature measurement sites are located in cities.
      The UN misquotes its own report. A UN press release coinciding with the release of AR4 blatantly misquoted the report, incorrectly claiming that man-made global warming was unequivocal.
      Underestimating past variation in carbon dioxide. The IPCC claims that variation of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere was very low, ignoring published research that shows much greater variation.
      Biased reporting of the literature. One of many examples where the IPCC ignores or disparages research that does not support its agenda, in the area of past solar activity.
      Where’s the beef? The crucial step of the argument for global warming – how carbon dioxide causes heating – is barely mentioned and the numbers not justified by the IPCC.
      Hypothetical positive feedback. The alarming predictions of the IPCC rely on the assumption of a strong positive feedback, for which there is no evidence.
      The lost continent of Antarctica. A world map of ‘global warming’ in the SPM omits Antarctica, where there has been cooling.
      Misleading claims about increased greenhouse effect. The IPCC claims that observations show an increase in the greenhouse effect, referring to one paper but ignoring more recent ones.
      Misleading statement about ocean heat. The IPCC SPM says that ocean heat content is increasing, without mentioning a paper that shows recent ocean cooling.
      Ignoring research that does not fit the agenda. Work of a Finnish research team with 34 publications in the field of tree ring temperature reconstructions is completely ignored by the IPCC.
      Inconsistent statement about wind strength. The IPCC SPM claims that the strength of westerly winds has increased – but if true this would be evidence for cooling of the atmosphere.
      Error regarding total radiative forcing. The ‘total net anthropogenic radiative forcing’ given by the IPCC is incorrect, according to climate scientist Roger Pielke.
      Unfair citation of criticism. IPCC author Kevin Trenberth cites his own criticism of the work of other authors, but does not mention those authors’ response to his criticism.
      Ignoring criticism of the surface temperature record. Many papers have been written raising questions about the accuracy and bias of surface temperature measurements, but these are ignored by the IPCC.
      No explanation for mid-century cooling. The IPCC has no consistent or valid explanation for a period of cooling from 1940-1970.
      False statements about tropospheric warming. The IPCC claims that the troposphere (lower atmosphere) has warmed more than the surface, but the IPCC’s own graphs show that this is not true.
      Unsubstantiated claims of human influence. The IPCC makes confident claims about man’s influence on the climate but has no evidence to support these claims.
      Misleading temperature trends (1). The IPCC claims that the trend from 1906-2005 is larger than that from 1901-2000 due to recent warm years, but in fact this is due to a sharp drop in temperatures from 1901-1906.
      Misleading temperature trends (2). The IPCC compares chalk with cheese in order to convey the false impression that temperature trends are increasing.
      False claim of warming since the TAR. The IPCC’s claim that temperatures have increased since its 2001 Third Assessment Report is demonstrably false.
      More false statements on temperature trends. The IPCC significantly underestimates temperature trends in the early part of the 20th century.
      False claims about hurricanes. The IPCC makes unsustainable claims about increasing hurricane activity and a link with global warming, ignoring key papers that find no link; this lead to one expert resigning from the IPCC.
      If you don’t like it, resign. Some scientists who do not support the IPCC agenda find they have no alternative but to resign from the IPCC process.
      Reviewer comments ignored. The IPCC reports undergo a process of review by scientists and goverments. But many valid comments and criticisms of the IPCC view are simply ignored.
      Exaggerated claims of increased precipitation. The IPCC summary greatly exaggerates the claims from its main report about an alleged very slight increase in heavy rainfall events.
      Trying to suppress work that doesn’t support the agenda. IPCC authors try to keep a paper by McKitrick and Michaels out of AR4, “even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is”.
      Hiding the decline – in the number of storms. IPCC authors insert a line about increasing wind strength into the final version of the SPM. They discuss evidence for declining number of storms but decide not to mention this.
      Hiding inconvenient proxy data. The IPCC refused to show proxy ice core data showing a warm medieval period in the Southern hemisphere, despite acknowledging a lack of such data and despite reviewer comments.
      False confidence in man-made warming. The IPCC SPM claims “very high confidence” regarding the quantification of man-mad global warming, but the main body of the report is much more cautious.
      Spinning the literature on cloud feedback. IPCC authors regurgitate chunks of their own papers on clouds, but cut back sections that refer to negative cloud feedback.
      Cherry-picking solar irradiance reconstructions. The IPCC selects outdated estimates of past solar radiance (to try to ‘explain’ early 20th century warming) while ignoring more recent research that shows very little variation.
      False confidence in long-term climate predictions. The IPCC makes the ridiculous claim that predicting the climate 50 years ahead is much easier than predicting the weather a few weeks ahead.
      Errors, Distortions and Exaggerations in the WGII Report
      Incorrect claim about Himalayan glaciers. The IPCC incorrectly said that Himalayan glaciers could melt to one fifth of their current area by 2035. This is probably a misreading of 2350.
      False claims about disaster losses. The IPCC claims a link between disaster losses and climate, by relying on a single cherry-picked non-peer-reviewed paper.
      Unsubstantiated claim about loss of Amazon rainforest. Chapter 13 of WGII claimed that 40% of the Amazon rainforest could ‘react drastically’ to a change in climate. The source for this was a WWF report that does not even support the claim. See also BBC report and The Telegraph.
      Error about the Netherlands and sea level. Chapter 12 of WGII claims that 55% of The Netherlands is below sea level. In fact the figure is about 26%. See also reports here and here.
      Unsubstantiated claims about Africa. A claim repeatedly made by the IPCC that agricultural yields in some African countries could fall by 50% as soon as 2020 has no basis.
      False claims about wildfires and climate. The IPCC claims that wildfires influence tourism, relying on newspaper reports and ignoring three expert reviewers who identify problems with this claim.
      Errors, Distortions and Exaggerations in the WGIII Report

      The report of Working Group III of the IPCC is concerned with “Mitigation of Climate Change”.
      Richard Tol, Professor of Economics, has investigated WGIII and reported his results at Roger Pielke Jr.’s blog. In his overall summary, he writes that the IPCC “substantially and knowingly misrepresents the state of the art in our understanding of the costs of emission reduction. It leads the reader to the conclusion that emission reduction is much cheaper and easier than it will be in real life.” He also writes that “all errors point in one direction: alarmism about climate change”, and refers to the “inability of the IPCC to constructively engage with valid criticism”. His specific criticisms are as follows:
      Part I. Claims by the IPCC in WGIII chapter 11 that climate policy would stimulate growth and create jobs are biased and not based on peer-reviewed literature.
      Part II. Again in Chapter 11, the IPCC highlights work that supports the view that costs of emission reduction are low, while ignoring or misquoting studies that find such costs are high.
      Part III. In the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) in WGIII, the IPCC underestimates the costs of emissions reduction, failing to correct its estimates for selection bias.
      Part IV. In Chapter 3, the IPCC misrepresents a paper (Fisher et al 2006), ignoring complaints about this by reviewers.
      Part V. In Chapter 3 and in the SPM, the IPCC incorrectly claims that exchange rates are immaterial, and misrepresents the literature. Several reviewer comments on this are ignored.
      Part VI. In the SPM, Table SPM1 underestimates the cost of reducing emissions, by a misleading process of “double counting”. The errors were pointed out by reviewers, but ignored by the IPCC.

      Acknowledgements: These examples come from many different sources. Many of them arise simply from a careful reading of AR4. Many originated from a thread at climate audit (which no longer exists) so thanks are due to those who contributed to that – especially Max. Several examples come from Roger Pielke’s Climate Science blog.
      A note on timings: Most of the items on WGI were written in the second half of 2008. The WGII and WGIII articles were written in early 2010, when the mainstream media started to note these errors.

      • gator69 says:

        Now where is even ONE peer reviewed paper refuting nature. You keep giving me the same old lies, with no proof. Are you your ‘experts’ failing you?

      • LOL, cut and paste psycho babble. One claim that had me laughing, that I know is 100% false and stuck out at me right away was this:
        “False claims about wildfires and climate. The IPCC claims that wildfires influence tourism, relying on newspaper reports and ignoring three expert reviewers who identify problems with this claim.” Errors, Distortions and Exaggerations in the WGIII Report

        I live in the west. I have worked with fire fighting teams. I know for a fact that wildfires influence tourism SIGNIFICANTLY. Rim Fire in Yosemite this year cost local businesses hundreds of millions in lost tourism dollars (final numbers will be in the billions), plus had huge effect on air quality, cancelled many outdoor concerts, basically killed of many small businesses in the Sierra foothills who make most of their money during tourism/summer season.

        Also, big reason for massive increases in wildfires across CA and much of the west, is due to beetle infestation killing off many pines. Those bark beetles appeared in disproportionate numbers in the past 30 years, due DIRECTLY to increased warming, which has been confirmed thru numerous peer reviewed articles.

        http://www.pnas.org/content/110/6/2193

        http://cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/wacciach7forests650.pdf

        So basically, while you two clowns continue to spew nonsense,of there being no significant warming trend, sometimes wavering back to “well there might be warming after all but its due to something else” Climate Change, and its consequences, are already being felt by many. Which is why most have tuned the skeptic side out.

        • gator69 says:

          Oh look! The natural variability denier tried to take a swing at 1 out of 57 points and struck out! :lol:

          Yes Lea, pine beetles and fires never occurred before man drove SUV’s!

          There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about recent wildfires or beetle infestations.

          Found that paper yet?

          ROFLMAO (And not because I am ignorant of the facts like you)

    • tom0mason says:

      There is no debate when you can not supply the required scientific paper (or reference to), all you have is bluster. I see you have pulled out that other old faithful about smoking. How about the 97% idea, that was another good joke! Just like the corrupt effort of the IPCC.
      Should I dig out some emails from CRU/ Hadley etc., for you?
      No you are not worth the effort.

      P.S.
      Persistent multi-decadal Greenland temperature fluctuation through the last millennium.

      Figure 18. :-)

      • tom0mason says:

        Funny that when I mention emails they head for the hills. That’s happened twice before, I wonder why?

        • gator69 says:

          I just listed 57 separate and valid points of criticism of the IPCC and got nothing in return. The religious care not for facts, for them it is all about the faith. Lea et al have been brainwashed, and willingly so, because it fits their world view and agenda. My only agenda is seeking the truth, and this never compromises my ethics or principles.

          “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”
          – Thomas Jefferson

          Why is it so hard for them to offer proof of their claims? It makes one wonder, would they actually sentence a man to death without certainty, based upon the hearsay of those who stand to profit from his death? It is a frightening question. Let’s hope our lives are never held in the balance, at the mercy of such fools.

        • tom0mason says:

          So true, but then again they want to believe – it saves on thinking.

  119. While denialists continue to spew psycho-babble about warming ending 15 years ago and clamoring about the cold spell of a few weeks ago…NASA confirms that 2013 is on track to be among the 10 warmest years on record.

    2013 Already Among 10 Warmest Years On Record: Report

    http://www.wunderground.com/news/2013-already-among-10-warmest-years-record-report-20131113

    And November 2013 was the warmest November…Ever!

    • tom0mason says:

      Yet more stupid weather report from the denier of natural climate.

    • tom0mason says:

      You must be feeling the noose closing in the warmist camp, when you have to cite one months weather as proof. One month!
      Pathetic!

    • tom0mason says:

      OK I will bother with the leaked emails and how they reveal that the report’s authors knew all along that the evidence doesn’t support what the IPCC were saying.
      In October 2009 Kevin Trenberth, a major architect in the IPCC deceptions, wrote,

      “Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming?…The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

      Notice his explanation in the last sentence. He acknowledged this paucity in 1995 following the Release of a study on weather data by the National research Council. He said,

      “It’s very clear we do not have a climate of the serving system. This may be a shock to many people who assume that we do know adequately what’s going on with the climate, but we don’t.”

      The amount of data has decreased since that time Despite this he worked with the IPCC building computer models that are totally dependent on the amount and accuracy of the data. Even so, and with full knowledge of these failings, he signed the Bali Declaration that said in part,

      “The 2007 IPCC report, compiled by several hundred climate scientists, has unequivocally concluded that our climate is warming rapidly, and that we are now at least 90% certain that this is mostly due to human activities.”

      Isn’t it nice to know that people like this have a major input to your ‘oh, so respected’ IPCC.
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Now there’s proof it’s a scam, they knew it was not real then, just as it is not now.
      You are propagandizing so that elites can impoverish the wealthy west and ensure that the poor of the world are locked into a system of dependence. A truly evil idea that will put freedoms in peril. But you and your kind think nothing of that.

    • Andy Oz says:

      I like alarmist Lea Numchuck. He’s a funny guy!
      Reminds me of Reggie Blowtorch and Harold Camping.
      Since Harold died in unforeseen circumstances, he could only be Reggie!

    • gator69 says:

      Lea, are you as stupid as you pretend you are? Or as evil? Where is your proof that man is warming the planet? All you have provided is cherry picked warming and hearsay.

      What you are doing is exactly what brought us Nazi death camps and witch burnings. In our modern western society, we demand a fair trial before sentencing, and that means we review the facts and ignore opinion. Where are your facts?

      I have shown you repeatedly that those whose opinions you value cannot be trusted, and yet you continue with this kangaroo court. Are you crazy? Finding a corpse is not the same as finding the killer.

      Our wonderful planet has been around for 4.5 billion years, and the only constant has been change. Darwin said that climate change was the driver of species. Every change in climate since climate began has been through natural processes, and using logic, one must first rule out natural variability before one can blame man.

      Why is it that you cannot produce even ONE peer reviewed paper refuting NV? You keep telling us that the vast majority of climate experts say it is man, and assuming they are scientists they MUST have ruled out NV at the beginning of this search for the truth. Right?

      You are participating in a type of mob rule that dictates that the ends justify the means. I refuse to burn witches and gas Jews based upon hearsay, I refuse to convict an innocent man without proof.

      God help us if the Lea’s of this world ever get any real power.

    • rw says:

      “psycho-babble” ??? You seem to be losing the thread.

      (I realize that for some people trying to organize their thoughts properly is a little like herding cats.)

  120. TomP says:

    Unfortunately, Steve Goddard doesn’t really provide enough information on how he derived the graph that he presented, but if we assume that he simply averaged all the data from the 1000-odd stations in this list, then he has a built-in bias arising from the fact that the geographic distribution is far from equal. For example, there a 15 stations listed in Texas, but 50 in New York state. There are around twice as many stations in the NCDC database east of the 100th meridian as west of the meridian. It is a known fact that western states are registering higher temperature rises than eastern states. In addition, there is the problem of the temporal distribution, with many stations starting operation mid 20th century and others closing down since 2000.

    • When I do comparisons vs. gridded data, the trends are identical. Northesatern US has warmed faster than the rest of the country, so your argument is backwards.

      • TomP says:

        You don’t say how you get your results. All you are telling us is that your results are different from NOAA, therefore NOAA is lying. But why should anyone believe your results if they can’t be verified?

  121. I don’t believe anyone anymore :-(

  122. This is all about “Political Science”. After 16 years without an increase in temperatures the IPCC is even more certain that we have to stamp out CO2. Want something less serious? Pay me a visit for some entertaining photography.

  123. Gamecock says:

    The government of the United States says you can’t keep driving your SUV, eat what you want, and keep your house warm. Subsequently, government reports says we are destroying the planet.
    How dumb would you have to be to not connect those dots?

    Herr Obama doesn’t like the West, and he’s doing what he can to sabotage it.

  124. 2013 Already Among 10 Warmest Years On Record: Report

    Wow, so that makes 2013 just like 62.9% of ALL years in the historical record.

    http://naturalclimate.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/268/

    • gator69 says:

      And when you consider UHI, which in reality GIStemp does not, 2013 is not warm at all.

      • Gamecock says:

        10-4. I consider the COLUMBIA UNIV OF SC station to be useless. I investigated it after SC declared a new state record temperature from that station in the summer of 2012. It is at best a CRN Class 3 station, lying between a parking lot and a railroad bed, and in the asphalt jungle of Columbia.

        http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/07/03/standards-for-weather-station-siting-using-the-new-crn/

        I complained to the Governor’s office, but got no reply. Which I consider significant, because earlier I complained about a high ranking state official and got a thank you call, and the official was forced to retire soon afterwards.

        I encourage all to investigate the stations in their area.

        • gator69 says:

          I have one near me that is on the roof of a museum, situated between air conditioning units. By definition it would not considered to be urban because it is not in a city. I sent a photo of it to Watts. Another station in my area is in a parking lot, up against a south facing limestone bluff.

          It doesn’t take a village to raise a temperature. ;)

  125. Watts? You mean that clown who has no meteorological, and actually no science degree whatsoever…who did some “radio weathercasts” in Nrn CA. That Watts? The one who claimed that urbanization around weather sites is what caused warming, only to have more detailed studies totally refute that. He’s a laughingstock…except of course on Fox News where they have the audacity to call that non educated dimwit a “climate specialist”.

    This Watt?

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Anthony_Watts

    “Willard Anthony Watts (Anthony Watts) is a blogger, weathercaster and non-scientist, paid AGW denier who runs the website wattsupwiththat.com. He does not have a university qualification and has no climate credentials other than being a radio weather announcer. His website is parodied and debunked at the website wottsupwiththat.com Watts is on the payroll of the Heartland Institute, which itself is funded by polluting industries.”

    ROFLMAO!!!

    • Andy Oz says:

      The climate religion is strong within Lea Appell. Take your rant to Septic Science as your blind followers are waiting for you their.

    • gator69 says:

      Oh look! The natural variability denier with no credentials is making an ad hominem attack!

      John Muir was also I credentialed yet he turned the geology experts of his day on their heads.

      Watts takes no money from oil companies, but the alarmists make billions off of their scam. Are you stupid?

      ROFLMAO (Because I love watching glass home owners throwing stones)

      • gator69 says:

        PS – Found that paper yet natural variability denier?

      • WATT takes no money from oil companies??? ROFLMAO.
        How naive are you? Of course Oil companies do not DIRECTLY give money. They fund front groups with nebulous names, who in turn, fund denialist pseado-sceince, . One of the many of these is Heartland.

        And Heartland DOES FUND many of college dropout Anthony Watts right wing propaganda projects.

        Anything else boys? Your BS is too easy to swat down.

        • Please send me the contact info for my denier money. I could use some Christmas cash. TIA

        • gator69 says:

          In 2002, ExxonMobil made a long-term research commitment by becoming a founding sponsor of the Global Climate and Energy Project1 (GCEP) at Stanford University in California. We have since contributed more than half of our $100 million commitment to the program. This pioneering research program is focused on identifying breakthrough energy technologies that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions2 and that could be developed on a large scale within a 10- to 50-year time frame. GCEP has sponsored more than 66 research programs at 27 institutions in Australia, Europe, Japan, and the United States.

          http://www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/safety_climate_gcep-research.aspx

          ROFLMAO!!!

  126. And Gator, Tom,
    If you want to criticize sensationalized climate reports, your first task is to write a letter of criticism to this article at the top. Using US data…2% of the earths surface, to make a claim for the entire planet? However, as we near the end of the year, the numbers are coming in, and making both of you look like total quacks, as 2013 is one month away from being confirmed as one of the top 10 warmest on record.

    – 2013 on track to be one of the top 10 warmest years on record –

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/geekquinox/2013-track-one-top-10-warmest-years-record-200559401.html

    So since both of you are so “concerned” about scientific integrity, could you perhaps post a rough draft of the critical letter you will write to the author of:
    “2013 Will Finish One Of The Ten Coldest Years In US History, With The Largest Drop In Temperature” and tell them how trying to connect that to the remainder 98% of the earths surface is utterly ridiculous.

    Also mention to them that November 2013 was likely the WARMEST NOVEMBER ON RECORD.

    I’ll be waiting for that letter…

    • Andy Oz says:

      You mean coldest on record. Fixed your typo there David.

      http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

      • Andy Oz says:

        Antarctic sea ice extent is more than 2 standard deviations above the mean. Will you lose your carbon tax income if you don’t defend your wacky climate religion, David? Media losing interest are they?. Oh too bad.

    • gator69 says:

      Oh look! The natural variability denier is using adjusted(fraudulent) GIStemp data to make a claim, instead of more accurate satellite data which shows 2013 is not a top ten lister.

      Instead of waiting on a meaningless letter, why not find EVEN ONE peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent or any global warming. I have given toy ample time denier.

      ROFLMAO (Because the natural variability denier cannot produce proof)

      • Gator, whether its GISS, NCDC, or HADCRUT4 they all show basically the same thing, with only very minor differences.
        Go take a look at all 3 and get back to me.

        • gator69 says:

          And RSSS?

          BTW, found that paper yet?

          ROFLMAO!!!

        • They all (including RSS) show the same thing).

          BTW,
          The reason you don’t see many recent individual papers on separating variability from anthropogenic forcing is because its already accepted scientific fact. The papers on these were mainly in the 80’s and 90’s, and when the IPCC was set up afterwards, they continued to answer those questions in their periodical reports. I understand you don’t believe them because you think the want to wrest away control from the oil companies and do a “Dr Evil” and take over the world, but the fact remains that when a panel of thousands of IPCC researchers, from various countries, for no extra pay, conclude that there is a 90-95% chance that the warming is anthropogenic, then there is no impetus to publish another article to confirm it. Kind of like someone tying to publish something saying “smoking has a correlation to lung cancer”. This is all long term accepted scientific fact and is no longer “journal worthy”. Journals publish new finds, not confirm older ones already confirmed as fact beyond 90% significance.

          So the burden of proof is now on someone to publish a peer reviewed article (not a blog) in one of the major Climate Journals that discounts this. The best I’ve seen is that there might be some similarity between today’s temperatures and those of 1300 years ago, but the big unknown being whether its a cycle, since you need several events to identify a cycle. Warming from 1300 years ago could have been from increased solar radiation at the earths surface, not from added greenhouse gasses trapping long wave radiation (heat) from the earths surface. Got some of those, and we can look them over, perhaps agreeing on some of it, or shredding apart any bogus claims within it.

        • gator69 says:

          The graph is of adjusted data.

          And hand waving is not a paper!

          Epic fail.

          Still ROFLMAO!

  127. Andy,
    SEA ICE?
    WTF does SEA ice have to do in relation to GLACIAL ICE MASS over the land mass of Antarctica?
    Antarctic ICE MASS has decreased significantly in past 10 years, similar to the rate of the Greenland ice sheet. (see chart below)

    Ironically, the added freshwater from the melted Antarctic glacial ice adds extra fresh water to the surrounding ocean area. Since everyone (except propagandist sheep clamoring of sea ice) knows that fresh water freezes quicker than salt water, THAT is why you see a few more ice cubes floating around on the surrounding open southern oceans…in addition to the ADDED GLACIAL ICE DEBRIS from the rapidly eroding Antarctic ice sheet.

    Jeeze guys…take a science class.

    • So sea ice (which has a lower freezing point and forms at lower latitudes and altitudes) is expanding in Antarctica, but glacial ice (which resides in colder places at higher latitudes and altitudes) is melting at -30C.

      You are qualified to write for Kook and Nutter at SKS.

      • Lol, this discussion is a lttle above your head I see.
        OK, lets break it down so that even graduates from the Limbaugh institute can keep up.

        Sea ice can be 90 percent open water, and only 10 percent ice. It forms and disappears very quickly…thus does NOT have a lasting effect on CLIMATE.

        Glacial ice takes hundreds and thousands of years to form. It is continuous (no open water in between) and DOES have a significant impact on climate by reflecting incoming short wave solar radiation, basically a cooling effect for the Earths surface. Its shrinking area results in overall warming.

        As large glacial ice mass breaks off into the ocean (as is happening now), it does not melt right away. Something the size of Rhode Island when it breaks off becomes a thousand pieces, each the size of a city block…then each the size of an automobile, Very little of “sea ice” is actually ice…its mostly open water. In addition the added fresh water melt-off from that ice can freeze at a higher temperature, thus a few more “ice cubes” floating around..

        There…do we understand now? Anything else I can clear up for you and the readers of this thread?

        • Yea, it breaks down really fast. Antarctica just passed the summer solstice and is surrounded by hundreds of miles of record sea ice area which are reflecting huge amounts of SW radiation back into space, cooling the planet.

          Kook and Nutter await you!

      • TomP says:

        Glacial ice sheets generally melt at the bottom where the bedrock contacts.

  128. Steve, what is the highest level science class you’ve taken? In college (if you actually went to college)..
    The open water with a few ice cubes foating around does NOT have an effect on climate. Ironically, to really slam this shut…the surrounding sea suface temperatures around the Antarctic have “warmed” slightly over the past several years. How could this be and still have added sea ice? Simple, less salinity on the surface (more freshwater) from the DECREASING GLACIAL ICE MASS of Antarctica melting into the salt ocean…thus that fresh water can freeze AT A HIGHER TEMPERATURE.

    Do you (and anyone else reading this) now see how ridiculous it is to cling to this “sea ice” claim as something related to cooling in the Antarctic or an expansion of ice cover.

    CheckMate on this one my friend….time for you to find a different game to play. Right now you’re just playing with yourself (lol) hoping to suck in a gullible reader or two.

    • So the 8.6 million km^2 of summer sea ice around Antarctica today is “a few ice cubes?”

      Kook and Nutter await your talents.

      • Chuck says:

        Steve I love it when you’re active in the comments section. Drop the hammer on this girl.

        • Lol…ever time Steve drops the hammer, he hits his own foot.

          And is Steven Goddard even his real name? And does he really have a science degree?

          Do a search on “Who Steven Goddard Really Is”
          You might find this:

          Goddard is your typical know nothing AGW denier blogger. He used to be a regular guest author on WattsUpWithThat, except that he became a regular embarrassment, and he and Watts parted ways. In one of the worst examples (although there are so many to choose from), Watts had to apologize for the utter stupidity of one of Goddard’s articles:

          “My apologies to readers. I’ll leave it up (note altered title) as an example of what not to do when graphing trends”

          http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/02/ar

          John Cook rebutted another of Goddard’s idiotic WUWT posts here as well:

          http://www.skepticalscience.com/Watts-Up

          Goddard now runs his own blog. Considering that he was too ignorant even for the exceptionally low standards at WUWT, not surprisingly, very few people actually read it. Apparently it’s not his real name and Steven Goddard is a pseudonym, which is funny, because Anthony Watts claims that everybody who writes on his site goes by their real names.

        • Wow. You turned out to be a typical progressive. You get your butt kicked and then go full McCarthy turd.

  129. I did kick your butt in a little too harshly…I will give you kudo’s for not censoring it and leaving it on your blog….you’re a good sport Steven (or whatever your real name is). :)

  130. Uhhm, because there is someone by a similar name who has a degree in engineering, who claims he is not the “Steven Goddard” of climate change denial.

    • I don’t do belief or denial. Those are words used by religious people.

      My interest is climate data and history.

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve.. I just noticed that you didn’t list the top 10 coldest US years. Here they are: coldest to warmest are: 1917, 1912, 1895, 1924,1903, 1916, 1929,1899, and 1905 or 1978 (tied). There hasn’t been a record cold year in 35 years. So, if you are right it should make big news. Only a few days left before we find out.

        • If Ken likes his tampered NOAA numbers, he can keep his tampered NOAA numbers.

        • Ken Towe says:

          Well, Steve… if NOAA’s top-10 are tampered by deliberately (or even inadvertently) lowering them, as you claim, that makes matters even worse. Regardless of whether they are tampered by lowering or untampered 1978 and/or 1905 will still be the warmest of the coldest top-10 years. But, if NOAA’s are no good, then whose top-10 coldest should we use, and what years are they? Only a few days left. Should be exciting to break a 35 year-old record.

        • I have a radical idea. How about using the actual recorded temperatures, like I do?

        • gator69 says:

          My point is that CO2 has NOTHING to do with the temperature of Venus.

        • Ken Towe says:

          NOTHING (in all caps) to do with the temperature of Venus may be a bit strong. You probably mean by itself, which of course it isn’t. Like the Earth water vapor is involved.

          “The large amount of CO2 in the atmosphere together with water vapour and sulfur dioxide create a strong greenhouse effect, trapping solar energy and raising the surface temperature to around 740 K (467°C)” http://www.imcce.fr/vt2004/en/fiches/fiche_n13_eng.html

        • Ken Towe says:

          Won’t make any difference Steve. If you are right about 2013 it will break a 35 year old record, if not an even older one. What is the warmest of the top-10 coldest years using the actual measured temperatures? No US state has even had a record cold year in the last decade, tampered or untampered. Only a few days left, so maybe some state will break that record too?

        • What solar energy is it trapping? The surface of Venus receives very little solar energy, and temperatures do not drop during the months long Venusian night.

    • I suspect that if this “Lea” person had any real argument, it’d make it, rather than trying to question the academic credentials of people who know more than it does.

      • Gamecock says:

        As a cultist, Lea/it over emphasizes the value of advanced degrees. Lea/it shows a lack of real world experience. Hence, I place Lea/it as a sophomore in college.

        My father was forced to end pursuit of his PhD 6 months before getting it. That did not make him any less smart. He was a pioneer in the computer industry.

        I have 3 doctors in my near family (cousin, niece, and nephew), all of whom have national acclaim. They are not smarter than me, but all worked a great deal harder in school than I did.

        In my decades in industry, I knew many smart people. Few had PhDs. I knew engineers that were smart. I knew engineers that were dumb. I knew technicians who were brilliant. I knew some PhDs who were good in their field, but otherwise not too bright. The world is made up of many kinds of people, each of whom is entitled to make their own decisions.

        The idea that a central elite can make everyone’s decisions is inherently evil.

  131. MACyoda says:

    I have been saying, ALL ALONG, FOR YEARS, that one of the big reasons they can get away with the Global Warm HOAX is because of air conditioning cities are being built in hot deserts where a few decades ago no one would consider building or living in. And now here you have a charts of RAW station data which should be corrected down, not up, to take out all those additional hot places where the new homes and the new temp stations are.

    This means that 2013 is VERY COLD, probably the COLDEST year EVER!

  132. Ken Towe says:

    MACY… Only a few days to go and we’ll find out. In the meantime, what is/was the coldest year ever in the US? How cold was it…before, of course, it was lowered by “tampering”?
    And, since the average US temperature is derived from all 48 states, how many states do you think will have new record cold years? There has only been one in the last decade. Should be a “blizzard” of new ones this year.

  133. TomP says:

    Steven Goddard.. What solar energy is it trapping? The surface of Venus receives very little solar energy, and temperatures do not drop during the months long Venusian night. Venus surface insolation estimates range from 17W/m2 (Tomasko et al 1980) to 50W/m2 (Lee, Richardson 2011), comparable to a gloomy overcast day on earth. The thermal mass of the atmosphere together with the high altitude winds of around 300km/h are sufficient to ensure a uniform surface temperature.

  134. TomP says:

    gator69 says: December 24, 2013 at 4:22 pm My point is that CO2 has NOTHING to do with the temperature of Venus.
    Unfortunately, not one single planetary physicist studying the planet Venus agrees with you.

    https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=isbn:1461450640

    • gator69 says:

      Chris Langan, the man with the highest IQ ever tested once said ‘Academia is a breeding house for parrots.’ So no surprise that the parrots are all singing the same tune, a tune that gets Polly crackers. All scientists also once believed in ether. Galileo was a heretic.

      As we have seen here on Earth, CO2 does not drive climates. Time for a new hypothesis.

      • TomP says:

        You guys are a hoot. Tell us again, what do you think drives the “climate” on Venus? Air pressure? At 760kelvin, the surface of the planet Venus should be radiating several thousand watts/m2 into space, while it only gets less than 50w/m2 from the sun. Do you notice a trace of a discrepancy there? Come on, try a little brain power.

  135. TomP says:

    stevengoddard says:
    December 28, 2013 at 9:58 pm Why do you think it is hot at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, but cold at the top? Is there more CO2 down there?

    Ha ha, snigger snigger.. Steven, I’m sure you know perfectly well how the greenhouse effect works so I won’t bother waste more electrons explaining it for the nth time.. but tell us, as you raised the subject of Venus, how do you explain the slight discrepancy between the incoming and outgoing radiation at the surface? Air pressure?

    • The lapse rate on Venus is about the same as Earth. If Earth’s troposphere was as tall as Venus, temperatures would be similar.

      Do you have anything intelligent to say?

      • TomP says:

        Yes – absolutely correct, on both planets, most of the radiation escapes into space from high up the atmosphere. The reason is that their atmospheres contain greenhouse gases. The lapse rate then determines the surface temperature from the top down. Now explain that to Gator69.

        • gator69 says:

          It isn’t the CO2, it is the pressure and density. What happens to air bottles when they are charged with compressed air? If CO2 could cause runaway warming, it would have happened here too.

        • most of the radiation escapes into space from high up the atmosphere. The reason is that their atmospheres contain greenhouse gases

          The reason that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere is that they’re greenhouse gases. The thing that makes them greenhouse gases is that they’re greenhouse gases. We know that they have this effect because they’re called greenhouse gases. QED.

  136. Ken Towe says:

    While we wait to find out if 2013 will be colder than one of the top-10 years since 1895 an article written in 1919 about the current coldest US year on record, 1917, has remarkably complete information, all presumably untampered. Title: “The cold winter of 1917-18″

    http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/046/mwr-046-12-0570.pdf

    What made that year so cold was the fact that there were 17 states that had record cold years. All of them still stand….and should remain so, especially if their temperatures have all been lowered by “tampering” since then.

    • Thermometer data shows 1917 as the coldest year.

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve…Is that 1917 thermometer data now available at NCDC untampered, or have they lowered it? Will 2013 be colder than 1917? If not, which of the top 10 coldest will 2013 beat? Any idea which states will participate?

        • They have lowered 1917 by about one degree, but 2013 won’t be colder than 1917 with measured data.

        • Ken Towe says:

          So, which year will it be? 1978 or 1905….they are currently tied, but one could have been lowered more than the other. And, which states will be the coldest?

      • Ken Towe says:

        Steve… NCDC just released their “tampered” US data for 2013. Doesn’t look like your assertion about 2013 and the top-ten coldest years had any validity. Not even close.
        Will you explain how you went wrong?

        • So you are using NCDC tampered data as evidence that they are not tampering with data? ROFLMAO

        • Ken Towe says:

          Yes, I’m using their massively “tampered” data. I am waiting for you to reveal the real raw untampered higher measured data. You haven’t even indicated what your top ten coldest years are, other than to say that 1917 would stay the coldest. Can you even find one state that contributed to the top ten coldest 2013? There must be at least one. In 1917 there were 17 record cold states contributing to the record coldest year.

        • Maximum temperatures came in 4th coldest
          Average temperatures dead heat for 10th coldest with several other years.

        • Ken Towe says:

          So… what are those RAW temperatures (JAN-DEC), and what years do they represent?
          Which coldest states contributed to those raw averages?

        • Ken Towe says:

          A low-resolution chart of the raw data? No direct comparison with the “tampered” data? No list of the new top-10 coldest years? If one draws a level thin red line from the middle of your 2013 square through all the yearly data back to to 1895 one finds that there are seven squares before 1940 that are equal to or below the line and eight squares below the line after 1975. How does that compare with the “tampered” years? Where does one go to find measured and untampered temperature data for the early years, say 1917, coldest year on record or 1921 warmest year on record four years later? Where did you get those raw values? It is well known that raw temperature data are often and commonly corrected, but that’s not tampering.

        • gator69 says:

          “It is well known that raw temperature data are often and commonly corrected, but that’s not tampering.”

          Translation: “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”

  137. MACyoda says:

    Al Gore is a GENIUS, look at all the people he has FOOLED into believing that a trace only 0.04%, no special attributes what-so-ever, of the atmosphere can change worldwide temps MASSIVELY! AND to top it off, somehow, he has become fabulously wealthy off of this scam. CAN YOU BEAT THAT?
    THE GREATEST CON MAN THAT EVER LIVED, HANDS DOWN!
    AND he was VP of the USA, a halfwit by all accounts, yet has the BALLS to sell this most ridiculous lie ever. Better yet, he has done all this after writing books about how much he HATES people and wants them ALL TO DIE?
    It is WAY beyond me how STUPID Americans have become and what a BRILLIANT con man can do with that, Al Gore is a genius, you MUST believe everything he says.
    AL GORE IS A GENIUS CON MAN, I would not believe ANYTHING that he says.

  138. TomP says:

    This plot shows the (TMIN+TMAX)/2 averaged for each state, then averaged across the country using the area of the states as a weighting factor.
    [IMG]http://i43.tinypic.com/2udx3fc.png[/IMG]
    This avoids the bias caused by the uneven distribution of weather stations across the country.
    The result shows that while 2012 was probably the hottest on record, 2013 was not so exceptional.

  139. S.D. Maley says:

    Not on the list,\, but a climate station since the 1890s, is 351765 (aka CONO3), Condon, OR. I mention it because the temperatures it reports are often significantly different from another station within ~ 300 ft (the latter is a newer Davis w/ solar sensor, CW7581). The difference between the two is frequently 5 °F. The Climate station tends to report higher and lower temperatures. The climate station is less favorably sited, being bounded on 3 sides by streets, and on the 4th by a state highway (which would all have been dirt when observations 1st began there).

  140. S.D. Maley says:

    Oops, my comment should have been written:

    351765 (aka CONO3), Condon, OR has been a climate station since the 1890s. I mention it because the temperatures it reports are often significantly different from another station within ~ 300 ft (the latter is a newer Davis w/ solar sensor, CW7581). The difference between the two is frequently 5 °F. The Climate station tends to report higher highs and lower lows. The climate station is less favorably sited, being bounded on 3 sides by streets, and on the 4th by a state highway (which would all have been dirt when observations 1st began there).

  141. Ken Towe says:

    Maley… Isn’t Condon, Oregon a COOP station…one where volunteers help report the data? Looking back, the annual average, both RAW and fully-adjusted annual average temperature, in 2008 was 47.78*F. What was it in 2012? But, how does any of that address Steve’s assertion that 2013 will be colder than the current top-ten coldest years on record, tampered or otherwise?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s