Why NCDC Is Making Fraudulent Claims About “Hottest Year Ever”

2014 is nowhere near the hottest year ever, but NCDC is claiming it is because the White House agenda requires some fake data.

ScreenHunter_4858 Dec. 01 18.12

Most of the land surface is below normal temperature this year.

unnamed (4)2014 is an average year at the end of an 18 year plateau.

ScreenHunter_4853 Dec. 01 07.56

NCDC is releasing fake climate data for White House political purposes.  Obama knows that he can get a “deal” by simply selling out the United States. He also knows that the Republicans in Congress are too lazy and confused to stop him.

About stevengoddard

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

48 Responses to Why NCDC Is Making Fraudulent Claims About “Hottest Year Ever”

  1. emsnews says:

    The entire premise for ‘warmest EVER’ is based on ONLY the ocean temps and mainly next to Alaska, nowhere else.

    This is simple to understand: the landmasses show cooling or heating BEFORE the oceans. When it warms up, the oceans warm up slower than land masses.

    When it cools, ditto: the oceans stay warmer longer as the landmasses cool. Since the sun controls all of this very, very strongly, heat from the sun takes a long time to heat up the oceans and these act as a bell weather to slow down cooling which would be very rapid if we didn’t have mostly oceans.

    Note how ALL the major continents are NOT ‘neutral’ they are mostly MUCH COLDER this last year!

    And soon enough, in ten years, so will the oceans, too. The global warming fools know this. They are of course, lying bastards about all this. I want to slap them all.

  2. emsnews says:

    Note also how all of Antarctica except for two tiny places that appear bigger only because of tweeking the data to expand it greatly…but the entire ocean surrounding Antarctica is cold as hell and we know that the Arctic is cooling down, too, as the Great Lakes, Hudson Bay also are colder than before, too.

    I can’t believe people could be this big a lying sack of sh*t except they are funded by our lovely banking cartel and DC politicians who are mainly quite corrupt. Feh on them all.

    • nielszoo says:

      You mean extrapolating temp data for all of Antarctica based on the station sited in the middle of the heat island of the McMurdo Base that’s many degrees higher than the well sited station at Scott (that they no longer use) makes it artificially warmer? Say it ain’t so.

  3. All this time I thought the increasing Antarctic Sea Ice was caused by

    1. ozone hole

    2. ice sheet discharge

    3. precipitation

    4. stratification

    5. ocean heat uptake

    6. winds

    7. natural variability


    You mean it was caused by 9. cooling?

  4. Password protected says:

    Global anomaly 0.110?i
    It is baffling how real (ok ‘climate’) scientists can conclude how warm today is in relation the past. Perhaps there are 100 years of widespread land instrument data and far less ocean data seems scant proof of anything. Proxie data does not have the resolution required to conclude anything in the 1c range. Snake oil.

  5. Andy DC says:

    This November has been extremely cold in both the US and Russia. It will be interesting to see how they make November the warmest on record!

  6. Anything is possible says:

    I love Ryan’s work, but he really needs slapping around the face with a wet kipper for showing global temperature anomalies using a Mercator projection. It is totally misleading.

    Greenland is, in fact, about one-quarter the size of Brazil and two-thirds the size of India. You’d never know it from that map.

    • Timothy Sorenson says:

      Hence the need for the Gall-Peter’s Projection Map.

    • Robertv says:

      All the arctic zones look impressively big thanks to this projection.We all know that 90N and 90S are just a point on the globe. To make them as big as the equator is very confusing especially for some politicians who still think that islands can tip over.

    • Beale says:

      The Mercator projection stretches the polar areas enormously. The projection used is much more reasonable on areas. The downside is that shapes near the poles are fantastically distorted, but you can’t have everything. The only kind of map that accurately shows the continents is a globe.

  7. emsnews says:

    Not that it matters since the lunacy about global warming at the North Pole is so stupid in the first place.

  8. Robert B says:

    You might want to check out Wrangle Island. Here is the Berkley Earth page for it http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/stations/169944 The last date is Nov 2013.

    The raw data show http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Stations/TAVG/Figures/169944-TAVG-Raw.pd
    that the recent years have been cooler than the long term trend, roughly the temperatures in 1930 and a lot less than 1940.

    Wrangel Island is in that red spot above Russia near the Bering Strait. Looks like most of the red spots have been calculated from ‘nearby’ stations and most of the dark blue is full of actual stations.

  9. Anything is possible says:

    Ryan has posted a link to this on his twitter feed – it shows global temperatures according to the analysis grid used to generate the above map all the way back to 1979. Very revealing. :


  10. But look at California. It’s hotter than normal there, yet again. And we all know that the hot and dry California proves that there is global warming.

  11. ozspeaksup says:

    same crap in Aus today
    climate spectator…
    Australia records hottest spring, up 1.67 degrees
    John Conroy
    BOM declares new record for second year in a row.

  12. philjourdan says:

    Not all Republicans are. And perhaps just enough are not so incompetent as to allow Obama to get his “deals”. Obama can agree to anything he wants. But it still takes 67 votes in the Senate to ratify treaties. And majorities in both houses to pass legislation.

    • nielszoo says:

      That doesn’t appear to be having any effect on Glorious Dear Leader Barak The First’s policy of doing whatever the “eff” he wants to.

      • Gail Combs says:

        There is also the problem that while our Constitution says a treaty has to be ratified by Congress, the ‘World Government’ says it only needs dear leader’s sign off depending on the treaty.



        Simple Signature (signature subject to ratification)

        Simple signature applies to most multilateral treaties. This means that when a State signs the treaty, the signature is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. The State has not expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty until it ratifies, accepts or approves it. In that case, a State that signs a treaty is obliged to refrain, in good faith, from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty. Signature alone does not impose on the State obligations under the treaty. See articles 14 and 18 of the Vienna Convention 1969.

        Definitive Signature (signature not subject to ratification)

        Definitive signature occurs where a State expresses its consent to be bound by a treaty by signing the treaty without the need for ratification, acceptance or approval. A State may definitively sign a treaty only when the treaty so permits. A number of treaties deposited with the Secretary-General permit definitive signature. See article 12 of the Vienna Convention 1969.

        Remeber the USA has SIGNED (12/06/92) AND RATIFIED (21/03/94) the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change under Clinton thanks to Hansen and Wirth’s Dirty Tricks.

        Therefore the Secretary-General could permit a definitive signature since the broad treaty has already been ratified.

        The UN sees the window of opportunity is closing as colder weather sets in and the general population of the EU, Australia, Canada, the USA and other countries have lost interest. So expect some dirty politics like only requiring a definitive signature.

        Obama has already done the deal with China so that hope went out the window.

        • Jason Calley says:

          They used another little trick with NAFTA. There were not enough votes to pass it as a treaty — so they just renamed it as an “agreement” and passed it with a simple majority.

      • philjourdan says:

        Sadly, yes. The leadership of both parties are spineless cowards that fear some ignorant racist journalist’s screed than the reality of the law.

  13. Justa Joe says:

    You’re dealing with the guy that helped create the now defunct Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). Rich Democrats walked away from that fiasco with +$100 million, but they wanted $100’s of billions. They would have had it if not for you pesky deniers. They’re not going to let that happen again.


    • Andy Oz says:

      Same here in Oz. The 2 yr carbon tax funnelled billions into the pockets of the ALP/Green constituents and out of the pockets of the poor and middle class. It was a disgraceful fraud.

      • Justa Joe says:

        I heard a news blurb today on the Radio that the USA is the 17 least corrupt country in the world according to some study. Generally western countries were considered less corrupt than your typical 3rd world type of country. I’d argue that any country that is involved in the climate hustle has reached unprecedented levels of corruption that are basically off the charts especially the the current US administration. They’ve probably scimmed off more money between just Solyndra, Fisker, and A123 than the GDP of you avaerage 3rd world country.

  14. ed k says:

    http://bluehill.org/observatory/2014/02/2014-mean-temperatures-2/ Boston area is just 1.1 degrees above 130 mean, my guess is that we will be pretty close to 130 mean by end of year. Some may say boston is not part of the world so it does not matter, it does matter to my tomatoes though.

  15. annieoakley says:

    Crime pays these days more than ever before, as far as I can tell. We will know for certain soon.

  16. It will be the warmest year on record, according to proper Scientists. The title of your website is about as far from the truth as possible! Proved by the idiot quote of Richard Feynman whoever the hell he is.

      • Gail Combs says:

        “….according to proper Scientists. The title of your website is about as far from the truth as possible! Proved by the idiot quote of Richard Feynman whoever the hell he is.”

        Yes, Definitely a moron religious fanatic who can not even be bothered to find out who Dr. Richard Feynman was. — Nobel Prize in Physics (1965) a very fine teacher and true scientist.

        At this point I rarely call anyone a scientist unless they have earned it out in the field. And for the moron religious fanatic, yeah I got my degree in Chemistry from a Big Ten University. Most ‘deniers’ are degreed scientists, mathematicians and engineers so we know the Scientific Method and we know Lysenkoism when we see it. Climastrology is Lysenkoism.

    • philjourdan says:

      Perhaps you should learn about the subject before posting on it. Your ignorance negates any message you wanted to convey.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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