US Climate Should Be Gone By 2020

NOAA lost 10% of their US temperature readings between 2012 and 2013. At the current rate of decline, the US will no longer have a climate by early next decade.

ScreenHunter_477 Jan. 30 05.33

About stevengoddard

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

28 Responses to US Climate Should Be Gone By 2020

  1. Ken says:

    This is very upsetting to me. As a tax-paying citizen, data is my property. I don’t care what political or personal ax somebody has to grind, they cannot mess with my property, according to The Constitution, anyhow.

  2. Bob Knows says:

    If they just don’t report cold stations the average gets warmer. Figures don’t lie, but liars figure. Got it.

  3. EW3 says:

    Since the science has been settled, why would us flat earthers need more readings ?

    • Andy Oz says:

      It’s like Invasion of the Body Snatchers in there.

    • The comment section on that tamino blog has no rebuttals from skeptics, it seems like a good-old-boy blog, a training blog for the mafiosa

      • The blog is called Open Minded what a joke. I posted this:

        Mike Sanicola | January 31, 2014 at 12:43 pm | Reply
        Your comment is awaiting moderation.

        This page is unbelievable. The entire article is about how skeptics cherry pick 1998 to show lack of warming, but you try to disprove it by showing a chart starting in 1979, the end of the mini ice age. I’m kind of wondering, do you think starting in 1979 is cherry picking or not? Because I think you probably don’t.

        I know this post won’t get past the “moderation” because you are much to Open Minded for that. This is science fraud, but you probably think this is science. The human mind is a terrible thing, that people can believe this bullshit.

        For the true story of global warming, go to

        • After editing my comment and making some BS “sticking out their tongues” comments, I posted this:

          Mike Sanicola | January 31, 2014 at 3:12 pm | Reply
          Your comment is awaiting moderation.

          Your reply is unsatisfactory. You use data from the 80′s and 90′s to prove that warming didn’t stop. That technique will always work, no matter how you do the stats, unless the current temp goes back to the 1979 temp. Duh.

          You aren’t fooling anybody except yourself. CO2 levels in the atmosphere are skyrocketing, yet warming has stopped keeping pace with it. You tried saying the warming is going into the oceans, but that turned out to be wrong since the oceans are cooling.

          Obviously, you will continue to say the world is warming, until the government stop paying you to say that.

          LEAVE A REPLY

      • Gail Combs says:

        Most of us gave up at those sites long ago because we don’t like singing with the choir.

        I refuse to go to the site and give them any traffic.

        • gator69 says:

          I have been banned from most of them, usually because I questioned why they ignore natural variability, and pointed out that there is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate.

        • My second comment didn’t get past moderation. I don’t know whether I’m banned now. I just assume Tamino is on the public dole.

  4. John Greenfraud says:

    It’s worse than that. NASA simply pencil-whips ocean temperatures to match their global warming theory. No kidding.

    • “Rising sea level is one of the most serious consequences of global warming. In the past 50 years, sea level rose about 1.8 (plus or minus 0.3) millimeters a year. Satellite observations since 1993 indicate the pace has accelerated to about 3 millimeters per year. What’s driving the acceleration?”

      The satellite data from 1993 to now shows no acceleration. It’s a straight line. What is causing the acceleration that doesn’t exist? That’s a real puzzle.

      • gator69 says:

        Hey Mike! Alarmists don’t like puzzles, they prefer to pretend they know everything.

        The real 800 pound gorilla is natural variability. Any sane human being would first need to disprove NV, before declaring that man is responsible for any global climate changes. This has never been done. In spite of decades of ‘peer review’ by ‘thousands’ of the world’s ‘climate experts’ and mountains of cash, not once have the warmists ever even come close to disproving the most obvious answer.

        My Earth studies began with years of geology classes, and taught me just how dynamic this planet can be. The ‘extreme’ and ‘unprecedented’ weather we have seen is nothing compared to what has come before. The alarmists make Chicken Little seem pragmatic.

  5. Gail Combs says:

    And so should the CAGW Con.

    Actually it may be gone by election time in 2016. (Now if only the Reboobs could give us something besides RINOs to vote for.)

    It would seem while reports like the new Chinese Paper are saying ““Our analysis shows that “data homogenization for [temperature] stations moved from downtowns to suburbs can lead to a significant overestimate of rising trends of surface air temperature.”

    TRANSLATION: The urban heat island effect [UHI] can result in a “significant” exaggeration of warming trends

    Mother nature is saying the Climastrologists guessed wrong big time.

    Steve Wilde and others are saying the Jets have been going ‘Loopy’ for the last decade or so making the Polar Vortex more frequent. This is substantiated by more NH snow. Blizzards killing livestock from North Dakota to Scotland to Tibet and snow in strange places like the Holy Land and mountains near the equator.

    Meanwhile the EPA is aggressively pursuing its WAR on COAL. Only they miscalculated.

    According to EPA, their modeling of Utility MACT and CSAPR indicates that these regulations will only shutter 9.5 GW of electricity generation capacity.

    The EPA made a really big OOPS.
    The Institute for Energy Research reports that closures of the coal fired plants that supply ~ 40% of the US electricity are coming mainly on the Eastern seaboard to the Midwest.

    …The Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently announced that coal plant owners and operators expect to retire about 27 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity by 2016 — four times the 6.5 gigawatts of capacity retired between 2007 and 2011. In 2012, electric generators are expected to retire 9 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity, the largest amount of retirements in a single year in America’s history.

    In 2011, there were 1,387 coal-fired generators in the United States, totaling almost 318 gigawatts. The 27 gigawatts of retiring capacity is 8.5 percent of total coal-fired capacity. The 2012 record retirements are expected to be exceeded in 2015 when nearly 10 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity are expected to retire. [i]

    Most of the units retiring are located in the Mid-Atlantic, Ohio River Valley, and Southeastern United States as shown in the map below….

    The Map shows the major area effected is Ohio down to Tennessee and across to North Carolina and up to Pennsylvania. This is the same group of states that have changed to neutral in their political leanings.

    This is the number of Congressional seats:

    Now think about where the Polar Vortex normally hits and take a good hard look at that map…

    This is data from 2012 so who knows how many more plants will close if the EPA starts turning the screws.

    Oh and it gets even better. For the plants NOT closing

    NERC estimates that nearly a quarter of our coal-fired capacity could be off-line by 2018 and that as many as 677 coal-fired units (258 gigawatts) would need to be temporarily shut down to install EPA-mandated equipment.[ii] These EPA regulations must be implemented within a 3-year window and the mandated equipment takes about 18 months to install. Because EPA’s three year timeline is so tight and the regulations affect so many units, utility companies are not sure that they can meet the standards and ensure reliability of the electricity system at the same time.

    While we are shuttering our coal-fired power plants, other countries are turning to coal for generating electricity. [Funded by US tax dollors via the World Bank of course]

    (Steve if you want to buff this up and turn it into a post be my guest)

  6. Andy DC says:

    I guess nothing is immune from budget cuts, though I personally consider weather records as something sacred.

  7. Eric Barnes says:

    I’m working on an electricity monitoring system that takes readings every 15 minutes of 8 different variables. Amazing that in this day and age that the climate geniuses have decided that less is more. I guess it is when you have to fudge the data.

  8. darrylb says:

    My sorry old eyes, when looking at the graph, see a decline in number of readings of over 20%!!

  9. gator69 says:

    If you like your climate data, you can keep your climate data!

  10. Apparently, temperature readings are not a renewable resource, and we are past the peak–some would be tempted to write a book to advertise this apocalypse (“Peak Climate, The Hidden Bomb: What You Need To Know For Your Family To Survive!”). With Eric Barnes’s excellent comment in mind (“Amazing that in this day and age that the climate geniuses have decided that less is more”), I will just sigh ominously and say, it is worse than we thought (and I am shocked, shocked, of course). They must be recruiting 5th graders (10 year olds, that is).

  11. nobody says:

    The science is already in…no need for the propaganda I mean scientific equipment.

  12. Greg Burton says:

    What is of interest to me is all of these sites could be modified to measure radiation as well as temperature, allowing the federal government to monitor, model and map radiation to allow for predictable and protective measures to be taken by Americans as the radiation from the HAARP/Stuxnet Fukushima Daiichi covert Sampson Option envelopes the northern hemisphere. Oh, well. Out of sight, out of mind.

  13. Maggie k says:


  14. Davol White says:

    I’ve been keeping meticulous temperature data since the beginning of this year and all numbers indicate a downward trend that is of significant concern. If I’m reading these numbers correct and these temperatures continue to trend downward then I fear the planet is heading towards an icy mass-extinction by the end of June. I’ve ran these numbers dozens of times and my math is solid. I’m using every resource at my disposal now to warn the world.

  15. Maggie k says:

    July and having a heat wave. June?

  16. alex cook says:

    this is bullcrap, all this stuff keeps on happening but the politicians keep ignoring all of it (not going to call names *coughcoughrepublicanscoughcough* but they dont do anything about it because they this its a load of bull (probably it would cause them to lose money or something) and nothing changes because NO ONE GOES OUT AND VOTES!!!!!!! we wouldn’t be having this problem if people actually voted and made there opinions heard. there’s one party called the green party that i vote for because they realize this is all a problem and try doing something about it, but no one votes for them because not one pays any attention. we should all try and vote for the green party cause they know what to do

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s