More Spectacular Fraud From Katherine Hayhoe And Scientific American

ScreenHunter_3293 Sep. 28 13.34

Large swaths of Houston were underwater yesterday after more than 10 inches of rain fell on the city during a 24-hour window.

This is the biggest flood this area of Texas has ever seen

While extreme weather events like droughts and floods occur naturally in Texas, precipitation in the state is becoming more variable, making droughts more potent and increasing the risk of heavy rainfall and flooding, Hayhoe said

Climate Change May Have Souped Up Record-Breaking Texas Deluge – Scientific American

As is always the case, Katherine Hayhoe and Scientific American are simply making up fake climate facts. Heavy rainfall events have not increased in Texas

ScreenHunter_3290 Sep. 28 12.32

In 1979, the Houston area received 43 inches of rain in 24 hours, more than four times as large as this year’s fake record event. In 1935, Texas received 22 inches of rain in less than three hours.

PaintImage422

Extreme Weather: A Guide & Record Book – Christopher C. Burt – Google Books

Texas is not getting drier, and precipitation is not getting more variable.

ScreenHunter_3292 Sep. 28 13.32

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

People trust academics and magazines like Scientific American. They shouldn’t. These people are participants in the biggest fraud in history.

About stevengoddard

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

20 Responses to More Spectacular Fraud From Katherine Hayhoe And Scientific American

  1. I wonder whether this would fall under consumer fraud or false advertising. Would a case with the Federal Trade Commission on something like this would work? We all know the Marketing Department of the Climate Industrial Complex is working overtime and is engaged in false advertising… Just wondering whether there is anything I can do… Unfortunately, I would probably have to actually BUY a SciAm magazine to be considered part of the “class”. Probably worth it if someone would actually open a case or publicly force SciAm to cease and desist.

  2. rah says:

    Are those historical high precipitation events recorded associated with tropical storms or systems?

  3. sfx2020 says:

    It’s amazing how the records, facts and scientific data carefully recorded and kept by Meteorologist are just ignored by so many people “reporting” the “news”. It does give the appearance of deliberate deception, rather than the usual ignorance and greed.

  4. Disillusioned says:

    I seem to recall just a couple years ago Texas was in permanent drought. Whatever the weather is, they’ll look at you with a straight face and cherrypick that as evidence of “climate change.” It doesn’t matter that present conditions and predictions be diametrically opposite of and contradict previous conditions and predictions. Not at all. Drought, floods, whatever, the scamsters depend on the stupidity, short attention spans (or amnesia) of a gullible public, willing press and government officials to believe, and to keep carrying the Big Lie forward.

    • Menicholas says:

      Exactly. Climate change is the Silly Putty of scientific theorizing.

    • Ted says:

      Texas WAS in a permanent drought. NOW, it’s in a permanent flood.

      SEE??? SEE??? SEE???? THE CLIMATE CHANGED!!! WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

      CO2 is so powerful it can even change permanent, aka unchangeable, weather patterns. And it can change them in opposite directions, repeatedly. Mommy Nature has no chance against that level of power.

  5. Menicholas says:

    How long ago was she saying that climate change meant it would never rain in Texas again?
    Now it accentuated the rains when the drought ended.
    Do these people even listen to themselves?

    • rah says:

      They don’t have to because they get their microphones with no critical appraisal of their past statements. But a lot of people are catching on I think.
      http://www.gallup.com/poll/185927/americans-trust-media-remains-historical-low.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles

      The old media realized where their credibility was going a long time ago. So what did they do? They created “fact checkers”! LOL! Fact checking was what journalists used to do! That was their job! Investigate, dig, and question to find the facts! But since only the naive believe their nonsense now they had to come up with “fact checkers” to try and make their lies stick. And I would bet my bottom dollar if Gallup would start polling on “fact checkers” most of them have their credibility is on a down slope.

      • Gail Combs says:

        A new Gallup poll shows that just 40% of Americans have “a great deal” or “a fair amount” of trust and confidence in the media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly….

        I consider “a fair amount” on the slide to don’t trust at all given the pack of lies the MSM spews.

        ….Gallup went on to note that this falling level of trust in the media mirrors the dropping level of trust in many of the nation’s institutions, not to mention the growing lack of trust in the federal government.

        There is an age difference in the level of trust in the media. Those under 50 had significantly less trust in the media than older respondents. Those over 50 trusted the media at 45 percent, while younger respondents only measured in at 36 percent.

        There was quite a spread between Democrats and Republicans, too. While both had low levels of trust, at 55 percent, Democrats trusted the media much more than the 32 percent realized by Republicans. The result from Independents was similar to Republicans at only 33 percent trust in the media…..
        http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/28/americas-trust-media-remains-time-low/

        Nice to know the younger voters don’t trust the MSM and I am not surprised in the dropping trust in the government or other institutions. Note that the Democrats are still useful dupes.

  6. jandlgatlin says:

    I lived in Houston from 1974 to 1982. About 1977 or 1978, the medical center area of Houston received about 17 inches of rain in about four hours. Many expensive cars belonging to doctors were completely flooded. The fire department had great difficulty making it to the hospitals in the area to ensure that the hospitals did not lose power. You wonder why the climate change advocates have to lie – if there story were really true.

  7. Stephen M. Saintonge says:

    Scientific American has been lying about politically charged scientific subjects since the late forties. Their articles on nuclear weapons and their effects were just disgraceful.

  8. Ernest Bush says:

    Houston is full of yellow pine trees. As you drive east or north you are driving into pine forests which get quite dense in some places. During the summer vapor from turpentine literally hangs in the air around the trees, Often, the trees are wet and sticky with rosin. The forest floors are full of pine needlles. You don’t read about the raging forest fires of Texas in the media. Its because there are none. Everything stays to wet and green to burn large acreage. This is true for half the state.

  9. Andy DC says:

    For the “good old days” like 1900 when humanity and nature were in perfect harmony and a single hurricane wiped out 10,000 people. Or 1925, when a single low carbon tornado killed nearly 700 without hitting a large city.

    If we would only give up our cars and electricity, then spend the next 100 years in communes sewing love beads and singing folk songs around the campfire, we might again recapture the wonderful, benign weather of that time.

  10. rah says:

    Those that believe her and believe those like her just fell of the turnip truck yesterday…… “those who stand for nothing, fall for anything.” Alexander Hamilton

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