No Correlation Between CO2 And US Temperature

The graph below plots the average annual temperature of all US HCN stations vs. CO2. There is no correlation. The US has the best temperature record in the world.

ScreenHunter_343 May. 19 14.20

Index of /pub/data/ghcn/daily/hcn/

Even if climate alarmists succeeded in reducing CO2 to 350 ppm through massive genocide and destruction of the world’s infrastructure, they would do nothing for the climate.

 I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.

– Prince Philip WWF Founder


About stevengoddard

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

17 Responses to No Correlation Between CO2 And US Temperature

  1. Eric Simpson says:

    Right. To get even just a marginal reduction in CO2 levels would entail a truly massive curtailment of mankind’s economic endeavors. Yes, we’re talking back to the stone age pretty much. That’s the leftist dream though.
    And what for? CO2 is not correlated in any demonstrated causal fashion with climate temperatures. Temperatures rise, CO2 follows. This seems elementary, so that’s what baffles me about the public and scientific perception. CO2 is an effect of temperature change. If CO2 was also a cause of temperature change than any change in temperatures would be amplified by CO2, causing more CO2 to come out of the oceans (as it is an effect of temperature change), causing more heat, on and on, a runaway greenhouse.
    Also, if temperatures fall, CO2 falls. So, as CO2 is an effect of temperature change, as CO2 falls, the temperature decline would be amplified, causing a further reduction in CO2, and a further reduction in temperature, on and on, until it’s a runaway snowball earth effect. And all the plants would die because CO2 would drop below 150ppm. There’s never ever been a runaway greenhouse despite CO2 in the past being as high as 7000ppm. And there’s only been one alleged (?) snowball earth and its cause was not attributed to a cascading reduction in CO2 levels causing by temperature decline. The greenhouse effect as postulated and propagandized by the fear mongering Chicken Littles is flat out bull.

  2. Chewer says:

    We’ve set records all over the state here in Alaska, with what has looked like an Alfred Hitchcock movie over the past week, with migratory birds dropping left and right from cold and lack of open ground to feed from.
    Some of these birds have turned into cannibals, and that is not a good or natural site…
    At least the fox and scavenger birds have full stomachs.

  3. cosmoscon says:

    Ostanding graph and I’m sharing this on twitter.

    I did a similar graph but used HADCRUT3 data from about 315ppm to present. You can also see that the CO2 correlation falls apart of late!

    • raindog says:

      Looking at your graph it is easy to see why they claim an association as you see a pretty obvious linear rise from 315 to about 370 ppm, but then you see a decline from 370 to 400 which obviously negates the association.

  4. Murphy says:

    You don’t know what you’re doing with the data. There are more samples (and more time, more variation) found in lower ppms because more time was spent there. Higher ppms are changing so rapidly that there’s not enough data to make a clear correlation between ppms and direct averages of temperature.

    Further, you did not specify which time frames you used for your data, weigh them against seasonal variability, or even display the mathematical formula for your trend.

    It’s like you took this in excel, made a graph, drew some trend, then said EUREEKA.

    The only way to really make a correlation between CO2 and warmer temps is to show what CO2 does in sunlight. This is called the greenhouse effect. Drawing a graph doesn’t show the correlation. Correlation does NOT equal causation.

    I could also show that availability of power steering correlates to how many people visited disneyland if I monkey around with the data long enough.

    Of course people above me will reblog this when it tells them what they want to hear and doesn’t show how reality works.

    The greenhouse effect is a known property of physics. It’s observable and testable, and you can even test it yourself with less than $10 worth of stuff from walmart on a sunny day. The truth is you don’t want to, and you don’t want to hear or listen to ANYTHING which questions or disagrees with you.

    Anyone you disagree with you call names. Anyone who calls you out you censor or block them fro posting. Meanwhile, you (someone who isn’t even a scientist in ANY field, much less climatology) posts a blog (which anyone can do) to post more things for your echo chamber so that people who only want to hear things that agree with them can continue the circle jerk that is your blog.

    But, keep posting this stuff. Better out than in – and at least I can have a good laugh at the drivel you keep posting.

    • There is no correlation between CO2 and US temperatures, no matter how much bullshit you write.

    • Chewer says:

      Are you a believer in AGW?
      Do you understand why climatologists have moved to investigating criegee intermediates, seeding within the upper troposphere, measurements within the varying bands comprising the stratosphere, mesosphere and ionosphere? Do you understand why the words could, might, should and have the potential to, are used so often? Do you understand that the regions/spheres from the surface to 350 miles above us are poorly understood, including EMF interactions (of all wavelengths & magnitudes), the particle tide movements, content variability and how the multiple drivers effect the biggest of variables (our oceans)?
      Do you also understand that the climatologists have no idea why the Indian dipole, north Atlantic oscillation, AMO, PDO, MEI, Antarctic stream and inter-tidal distributions change, what stimulus or stimuli cause these changes in sign and no didly shit about the massive overturning characteristics and events?
      Are you brain dead or just gullible?
      Do you understand why every scientist agrees with scientific theories (all of them), but disagree on the working hypothesis called “AGW”?

    • T.O.O. says:

      Hear hear.

    • cousinarlo says:

      If it’s drivel why don’t you just go and join the Mann/Gore circle jerk?

  5. And that damned canary in Alaska is turning blue from the cold…

    “Anchorage sets record for longest snow season”

    “232 days – it took over 30 years for Anchorage to set a new record for the longest snow season on record.

    The National Weather Service measured 2/10ths of an inch just after 9 p.m. Friday and 1/10th Saturday morning – breaking the old record of 230 days set in 1981-1982.

    Anchorage police responded to 22 crashes, 4 with injuries and 37 vehicles in distress between midnight and noon Saturday. Police say roads were wet and not icy midday and “motorists should use caution if the temperatures drop below freezing”.

    Other parts of the city had much higher amounts of snow, however official measurements must be consistent and observed at the Sand Lake forecast office. The recent snowfall also broke the daily record for liquid precipitation, lowest maximum temperature for May 17, and a host of other records.

    NWS says Saturday evening’s forecast calls for “mostly cloudy with isolated snow showers in the evening…then partly cloudy after midnight – lows in the upper teens to mid 20s and north wind to 15 mph.”

    For Sunday, the forecast will be mostly sunny, highs in the 40s, and light winds, according to NWS.”

    • Chewer says:

      The Anchorage bowl is at sea level.
      Once you get on the other side of the Chugach range, life changes:)
      The interior will see low temperatures tonight/tomorrow morning in the teens:)
      We gardeners are screwed this year…

  6. gator69 says:

    “Even if climate alarmists succeeded in reducing CO2 to 350 ppm through massive genocide and destruction of the world’s infrastructure, they would do nothing for the climate.”

    Or more likely make things worse…

    “Based on our own analyses and the documented unscientific behavior of global warming alarmists, we concluded that the global warming alarm is the product of an anti-scientific political movement.
    Having come to this conclusion, we turned to the “structured analogies” method to forecast the likely outcomes of the warming alarmist movement. In our ongoing study we have, to date, identified 26 similar historical alarmist movements. None of the forecasts behind the analogous alarms proved correct. Twenty-five alarms involved calls for government intervention and the government imposed regulations in 23. None of the 23 interventions was effective and harm was caused by 20 of them.”

    Click to access ags2011congress.pdf

  7. adrianvance says:

    CO2 is a “trace gas” in air, insignificant by definition. It absorbs 1/7th as much IR, heat energy, from sunlight as water vapor which has 80 times as many molecules capturing 560 times as much heat making 99.8% of all “global warming.” CO2 does only 0.2% of it. For this we should destroy our economy?

    Carbon combustion generates 80% of our energy. Control and taxing of carbon would give the elected ruling class more power and money than anything since the Magna Carta of 1215 AD.

    See The Two Minute Conservative via Google or: then when you speak ladies will swoon and liberal gentlemen will weep.

  8. scorpy09 says:

    Are the surface stations surveyed in the effort reported at used as sources in the data reported here? If so, we might conclude that US temperatures have not just remained steady, but are falling.

  9. elmer says:

    where are you getting the CO2 levels? Are you using Mauna Loa?

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s