A group of scientists led by senior NASA climate adviser Gavin Schmidt has heavily criticised a recent Daily Sceptic article that presented new evidence from the results of meteorology balloons showing global temperatures had slowed over the last two decades. Writing in the Climate Feedback ‘fact-checking’ blog, the scientists note that the Daily Sceptic article claimed: “Global warming started to run out of steam over two decades ago… Half of the apparent global temperature increases from January 1910 to January 2000 is due to administrative adjustments.” The article is said to be “Inaccurate”.
The first part of the statement is a view held by many eminent scientists analysing data from accurate satellites. The second part of the claim is made by Professor Ole Humlum of the University of Oslo. The 50% adjustment refers to the figures produced by the NASA-connected GISS surface temperature dataset. The ‘fact check’ does not dispute the figure, but Schmidt dismisses the 90-year trend as “just a cherry pick”. Meteorologist Victor Venema from the University of Bonn complained that the term “administrative adjustments” was not used in science.
Our article was published on May 19th under the heading: “New evidence shows global warming has slowed dramatically over last 20 years”. We reported that in a major re-evaluation of 40 years of telemetric data from meteorology balloons rising through the troposphere, scientists confirmed that temperatures had mostly paused since around 1998. We linked to the original research, and published the following graphs, so that readers could take a view on our statement.
The graphs show the results for the northern hemisphere up to 70°N and the tropics. Most of the warming over the last 40 years occurred up to the late 1990s. The tropics, it was noted, had warmed less than the north, and in fact at 11 km it is difficult to discern any significant warming at all. We also reported that temperature pauses from 1998-2010, and a current one lasting 91 months, had been largely wiped from all major surface temperature datasets. Over the last decade, the U.K. Met Office has added 30% heating to recent figures in its HadCRUT record and depressed earlier measurements.
We also noted that all these ‘adjustments’ provided covering fire for journalists quoting ‘scientists say’, to claim continuing warming and provide ongoing support for the political Net Zero agenda.
The author of the balloon report, the Italian meteorologist Fabio Madonna, takes issue with our analysis. He notes that in his paper, “it is never mentioned that ‘temperatures have mostly paused since around 1998’”, although he accepts there was a slowdown in the northern hemisphere from that date. He argues that the results from the tropics at 300hPa (11 km) show a “significant warming after 2000… in line with the statement by the IPCC”.
Perish the thought that Madonna is cherry picking a low 2000 date after a very strong El Niño surge to make his point. In attempting to spot statistical trends, the longer period used the better – 90-years, for instance, is excellent – and I stand by my observation that there has not been much warming seen in this record for the tropics for over 40 years. The two pauses noted are clearly seen, and the fall from another very powerful El Niño oscillation in 2016 is noticeable. Venema at least spots the considerable powers your correspondent brings to analysing this data, noting that Chris Morrison’s “actual evidence” seems to be his “own research eye-ball estimate of warming”. Presumably covering himself in case it is proved the author’s eyesight is not faulty, he notes that Madonna’s evidence is “just one dataset of many”.
Most of the arguments deployed against the Daily Sceptic and other investigatory work are along the lines, ‘look at the surface datasets, be fearful of the future predictions made by models and read your IPCC bible’. GISS director Schmidt argues that temperature corrections are made to accommodate new stations and algorithms are updated. In fact, trying to arrive at a global surface temperature is the product of measurement, model computations, smoothing, proxy data and estimations. For that reason, the continuous and accurate satellite measurements are often seen as a better source of temperature data.
Of course, Schmidt is keen to support surface temperature databases, but he is also keen to promote the record of climate models. Writing in the Spectator last year, he noted that some might be wary of basing decision on models, especially given the problems in forecasting the Covid pandemic. But it was important to realise that most outcomes depend on the overall trend, he said, and not on the “fine details of any given model”. He went on to argue that the track record of models going back to the 1970s “shows they have skilfully predicted the trends of the past decades”.
“Skilfully predicted” is one way of describing the track record. Others are available. The above graph was produced by Professor Nicola Scafetta of the University of Naples. It plots 38 of the major models showing their predictions set against the thick green line of the satellite record. In his view, the models should be “dismissed and not used by policymakers”. Schmidt is understandably cautious about focusing on the “fine details” – this presumably being a reference to the fact that the models are never correct in their forecasts. In fact, we can see that the predictions started to go haywire 25 years ago, no doubt coincidentally just as the global warming fright started to gain political traction. No doubt again by coincidence, from around this time the major temperature datasets started to heat up their recent record, removing the slowdowns and pauses seen in the satellite data.
In 2013, Schmidt appeared on an American TV show with Dr. Roy Spencer, a fellow NASA scientist. Dr. Spencer compiles the widely-used University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) satellite data record. Schmidt refused to sit down in the same studio with Dr. Spencer and debate climate science. He suggested he did not need to be arguing with people “just to make good TV”. At 6.30 minutes he is invited to meet Dr. Spencer, but said he was not interested in staying.
The authors of the Climate Feedback ‘fact check’ are ungenerous to those who hold sceptical views and presume to argue from their own authority and that of the IPCC. The Daily Sceptic is said to be a website with “a history of publishing scientifically unfounded claims”: the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which published Professor Humlum’s work, is said by Venema to be an “anti-science think tank”, while Chris Morrison “presents” himself as a former financial journalist (it’s true, I should know, I was there).
Venema goes on to suggest that claims of “administrative adjustments” correspond to the “conspiracy theory” that an “open group of thousands of scientists from all over the world and numerous disciplines, are conspiring against humanity by pretending that the world warms more than it actually warms”. Who knows, but the common exam request, ‘Discuss’, springs to mind. Heaven forbid that any climate scientist would seek to ‘hide the decline’.
I concluded a recent article with the words of the distinguished atmospheric physicist Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, who said the current climate narrative was “absurd”, yet it had universal acceptance. In a “normal world”, the counter-arguments would be compelling, he argued. I added: “Perhaps it is the trillions of dollars being diverted into every green project under the sun, and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists, along with the political control offered to elite groups in society by Net Zero, that currently says it is not absurd.”
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Chatting to someone local here in the Dominican Republic about their cocoa production – apparently it has suffered in recent years due to labour shortages. Work harvesting the beans is too hard. Brexit truly has long tentacles.
F off downvoting twat
I think you have upset a few Next Tuesdays tof. Must be over the target.
LOL exactly! There’ll always be more of us legit peeps than the toxic nob-jockies. The big tell is when somebody gets shit-loads of ‘dislikes’ but not one single reply from anyone explaining why…Hmmm.. The Hamster Penis Brigade strike again!
Keep it up boys! Oops, soz, I forgot that you can’t can you….? LMFAO
Cheers buddy.
Always disappointing when you see downvotes and no-one has the courtesy or courage to tell you what they disagree with and why – against the spirit of DS, IMO.
Perhaps it’s to do with John C Maxwell’s observation that great people talk about ideas, average people talk about themselves and small people talk about others. Amidwesterndoctor looks into this in his recent take down of Peter Hotez.
I agree against the spirit of DS but actually what is so upsetting about your comment?
Maybe someone thought I was serious about Brexit causing labour shortages?
I was merely reporting faithfully what someone said to me unprompted and I suppose put my own spin on the issue though it’s a fact that Brexit is blamed for labour shortages whereas they seem to be common everywhere- Sweden and Italy are two places I have recently visited where they are suffering from the same issues.
I expect the causes are myriad though I feel that lockdowns and furlough have been demotivating and of course there has been enormous government caused disruption to businesses.
I suppose my reply to myself was somewhat low class (posted while drunk) but an attempt to goad down voters into a debate. To be fair, overall for a largely unregulated forum the quality is high even when there is disagreement.
“Leading Conservative MPs launch pre-election push for bolder green agenda” – Champions of environmental protection, Alok Sharma, Simon Clarke and Chris Grayling are among 23 leading Tory figures to join a new Conservative Environment Network advisory council, says Business Green.
The name’s all wrong. It should be:
Conservatives for
Urgent
National
Transition into
Servitude.
Sharma’s my MP, the toe-rag. He’s definitely one of the above. He’s never received my vote, but it doesn’t seem to stop him unfortunately.
If so, then ask him why this graph has sent the government into a state of hysteria? It represents a small amount of warming since we left the LIA in 1850. Odd that it should warm after an ice age?
Ask him also. The hypothesis that CO2 controls temperature is a very simple one. Yet there is no proof of it, no papers, nothing. Also note to him, that (Popper’s protocol, now accepted as a means of determining the truth of any scientific hypothesis) the null hypothesis on climate is that natural variability controls it. Ask him for the papers that disprove that.
Ask him also if he is aware that any warming propensity CO2 may have is almost all played out.
Also note that long and short term, there is NO correlation between CO2 and temperature, that the planet has been warmer with less CO2 and colder with more.
Ask him also why he is an idiot.
Yeah.. but that’s the truth Jeremy, no politician or green zero fanatic is going to listen to that..
Yep, still a clown world.
we find:
Prof Ferguson et al’s Report 9 was demonstrably wrong on the day it was published (16 March). Extrapolation of the death toll up to that date showed that mortality would peak in early April at around 1,500/day.
Report 9 had the epidemic mortality in GB somehow marking time until April and then increasing to about 22 per 100,000 population ~= 14,340 per day in late May. To be fair the report authors do state ‘Epidemic timings are approximate given the limitations of surveillance data’.
With a height of 14,340/day and a total of 510,000 deaths the shape of Report 9’s mortality curve is defined. If we shift Report 9’s curve so that the date of the first few deaths matches reality then we can compare it to reality:
If we zoom in on early March it looks like this:
So at what point should our governments and SAGE have realised that Report 9 and the like was utter rubbish?
If ‘Horrifying predictions of upwards of 500,000 deaths are infamous for spooking No10 into declaring the first lockdown in March 2020‘ then why didn’t they unlock us again when they realised how wrong Ferguson et al were?
Did our governments do any analysis to see how effective the first lockdown had been? If so, why did they try the same failed experiment twice more?
The doomsday report was rubbish and they should have known that before the first lockdown announcement.
Lockdown was immoral, ineffective, destructive and futile.
Chris Whitty is wrong.
And this isn’t including the fact that Ferguson’s models have been entirely wrong for his entire career: why pick such obviously flawed ‘bad’ models, why not a range? Old Boy network of BMGF/WEF backscratchers, perhaps?
He has a DPhil in physics, surface chemistry.
“It gave ministers (a) chance to work out where they were going to “bury the bodies” he said.”
So actually where and how were they going to bury the bodies? Does he say and is it common knowledge? Have I missed it?
Well, there’s the useless HS2 workings?
Of course Chris Whitty is wrong.. he’s a paid off liar. I wonder if he ever looked at the graph below. Not that he would have needed to, because he knew the whole covid thing was a hoax..
“Morbid worst case models”….given that the country has bloated the public sector with managerial types, not actual workers wielding equipment to get a job done, where was the manpower going to come from to deal with the consequences? You can’t bandy numbers around without also assessing risk and probability, did they include safety engineers to assess the models?
The NHS employs 1.4 million, only a fraction of whom do medical stuff, and most are too lardy for any physical exertion. The army is probably less than 80000, 18 times smaller than the NHS, the navy is around 30000, the RAF probably less than 40000. The councils are mainly keyboard jockeys, the actual work is done by contractors. There will be a civil contingency plan at local level, but if everyone is shivering with fear under their duvet, that will go to ratshit in the time it would take an MP to swift a glass of Bolly. Was the purpose of lockdown to confine people so they died tidily at home?
The inquiry needs to hear from the undertakers, I wonder if John O’Looney has been invited?
The inquiry is a waste of time, particularly on DS, and money the country hasn’t got, for a conclusion that is already written and from which we know “lessons will be learned.”
God this is disgusting. It was known by the US Navy that the Titan sub imploded on Sunday but the Biden government deliberately withheld this information because it served as a convenient distraction from the latest BS controversy surrounding his scummy, vile, paedo, coke-head son. Those poor families who held on to hope. No words. And people would vote for such a disgraceful POS to stay in the White House?? The worst, most toxic and callous President in US history!
”The implosion of the Titan submersible submaraine that went missing Sunday was known to the US Navy days ago, though the US Coast Guard only found debris of the wreckage on Thursday.
Human Events Jack Posobiec made that connection, saying that “The WSJ is reporting the US Navy detected the Titan implosion on Sunday but Biden held the news until today’s whistleblower testimony on Hunter. The entire thing was a distraction op.”
The Navy was aware of the implosion only hours after the Titan began its journey to the Titanic, where the 5-man crew anticipated viewing the wreckage of the storied, ill-fate luxury liner that sank to the bottom of the sea in April 1912.
A US defense official said that as soon as tht Titan lost communications on Sunday, they began listening under the sea for signs of what was happening. The Titan imploded some 1600 feet from the Titanic, killing all 5 men aboard, including a 19-year-old. The defense official told the Coast Guard at the time what they had heard.”
https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-us-navy-detected-titan-implosion-on-sunday-but-biden-admin-only-released-news-on-thursday-after-hunter-plea-deal-and-whistleblower-reports-released
Holy sh*t. I was even chatting about it with my chiropractor yesterday. How despicable – using the tragic deaths of 5 people just to get us to ‘look over there’ rather than Hunter Biden. How much lower will they go?
Oh a long way yet…
I must say, the thing that got me emotionally involved in this story was the fact a father was onboard with his 19yr old son. A family member was quoted as saying the son didn’t even want to go and was terrified but it sounds like he was guilted into it from his father. I was trying to imagine how his mother must have been feeling this whole time when communication was lost. But what kind of deluded and irresponsible parent puts pressure on their kid to go on a massively hazardous expedition like that, especially if the kid was voicing their very valid concerns? Now the father is dead and took his son with him. It would seem that both types of pressure are the cause of the poor kid’s demise.
Anyway, I shall never apologise for being a compassionate person. And this is just the latest example of what an extremely despicable and loathsome character that crazy, dangerous old slimeball fart is. I hope there’s another strategically placed obstacle for him to trip over and hopefully next time break his bloody neck!
Try not to be judgmental about the father or trusting about what the media say on the subject. People take risks every day and bad things happen, such as unnecessary deaths from reckless driving. That’s human nature and the reality of life. What gets me is the politicisation of such events. How a tradegy gets turned into another reason for us all to be angry and fearful.
Nothing surprises me these days Mog.. in fact I was aware the H Biden thing was going on and wondered. We are dealing with evil-ruthless people, the very same people who want the vast majority of us dead..
Small sub implodes and the acoustic data is picked up seconds later, analysed, and within a few minutes the result pings up the food chain from the matelots to the captain, and thence up the chain of stars to the generals, chiefs of staff and to the president. Given that the sub mission was not military or classified, loads of people would have known about it within a couple of hours, so why didn’t the information leak out? Were there orders from above? Why sit on it, given multiple nations were mobilising assets at vast effort and expense, with all the attendant operational risks?
Presumably the Baltic is also bristling with similar sonar and electronic sensors and yet NATO / US cannot find who blew up a pipeline with a shedload of explosives. Strange, really.
“How should schools handle ‘furries’?”
Nice article, but does Tobes realise that ‘furries’ are potentially something far worse and much more sinister? Robert Malone has just written about it.
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/the-world-of-school-aged-furries
‘Furries can be something else all together. In adults, most furries tend to be male and two-thirds identify as homosexual. Furries are often truly attracted to animals (which would be type of sexual fetishism). Sexual fetishism is a sexual fixation on a nonliving object, animal or non-genital body part.
How are sexual fetishes formed? Many social scientists believe that a “critical period exists during an individual’s early sexual experience that creates a “love map” or Gestalt of features, movements, feelings, and interpersonal interactions associated with sexual reward. ” Sexual “fetishism could result from these abnormal early sexual experiences, when a “child is imprinted with an overly narrow or incorrect concept of a sex object” (Wiki).
This of course, is a tacit admission that imprinting, grooming, sexual abuse and early sexual experiences can impact on a person’s lifelong sexual preferences and behaviors.
A recent paper highlights some of the features shared by furries:
The “Furry” Phenomenon: Characterizing Sexual Orientation, Sexual Motivation, and Erotic Target Identity Inversions in Male FurriesArchives of Sexual Behavior volume 48, pages1349–1369 (2019)
Children indulging in the furry world may seem cute and even innocent. But don’t be fooled. Children acting as furries are being exposed to concepts, images and videos that are dangerous and sick. Children can be easily influenced by social media in ways that are extremely harmful to their psyche and their soul.’
“How should schools handle ‘furries’?”
(Reposted without all the links which got the first one deleted.)
Nice article, but does Toby realise that ‘furries’ have a potentially far more dangerous and sinister meaning? Robert Malone has recently written about it.
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/the-world-of-school-aged-furries
‘Furries can be something else altogether. In adults, most furries tend to be male and two-thirds identify as homosexual. Furries are often truly attracted to animals (which would be type of sexual fetishism). Sexual fetishism is a sexual fixation on a nonliving object, animal or non-genital body part.
How are sexual fetishes formed? Many social scientists believe that a “critical period exists during an individual’s early sexual experience that creates a “love map” or Gestalt of features, movements, feelings, and interpersonal interactions associated with sexual reward. ” Sexual “fetishism could result from these abnormal early sexual experiences, when a “child is imprinted with an overly narrow or incorrect concept of a sex object” (Wiki)….
Children indulging in the furry world may seem cute and even innosent. But don’t be fooled. Children acting as furries are being exposed to concepts, images and videos that are dangerous and sick. Children can be easily influenced by social media in ways that are extremely harmful to their psyche and their soul.’
The Briggs article on the quagmire that is academia is worth a read. Peer-review is still held up as the gold standard but people have been sounding the alarm on the state of this system for years. I think Covid mania really highlighted the total corruption at play here and how easily Big Pharma manipulate the system so it’s always in their favour but it still isn’t common knowledge. I mean, we have the likes of such accomplished and highly credentialed academics like Prof Fenton who can’t even get his work onto a pre-print server but Pharma shill and fraud Hotez gets his crummy papers published in journals no probs. Here’s a 2min clip of Dr Jason Fung explaining the bad joke that is peer-review these days;
https://twitter.com/_aussie17/status/1671386895954354184
Recent discussion between Pierre Kory and Bret Weinstein on Darkhorse podcast is good on this. And it’s not just pharmaceuticals but most areas of research, including processed food producers and of course tobacco, who has corrupted science. (Steve Patterson is another good and independent source for a deep dive into this). However, business is just doing what it will do if not restrained. Our biggest problem is the total capture of governments and so-called regulators (who now consider themselves enablers) and the willful blindness of academia, medical professionals, etc. Most doctors struggle to come to terms with the fact that what they have learnt, their whole toolkit, is making us sick and they need to go back to basics, i.e consider themselves investigative healers rather than the technicians they have become.
‘Britain is “in the grip of a heart and stroke care emergency”.
No doubt, vaxxine deaths.
I’ve monitored the complete news shutdown of Shane Warne’s vax induced death this week. And this during the Ashes too.
If one of the greatest sportsmen of all time can be disappeared, don’t hold your breath for government and big pharma to come clean.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4118557/leading-conservative-mps-launch-pre-election-push-bolder-green-agenda
That should seal the deal for Kneel and Ranting.