Global Warming Science - www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming

US – No Significant Warming

[last update: 2011/03/27]

NOAA 1989 – No Significant Warming For 100 Years

[http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/26/us/us-data-since-1895-fail-to-show-warming-trend.html?scp=1&sq=%22US%20Data%20Since%201895%20Fail%20To%20Show%20Warming%20Trend,%22&st=cse]

Other statements from the above article:

· Dr. Hansen and other scientists have said that that there is a high degree of probability that this warming trend is associated with the atmospheric buildup of carbon dioxide and other industrial gases that absorb and retain radiation. But other scientists, while agreeing with this basic theory of a greenhouse effect, say there is no convincing evidence that a pollution-induced warming has already begun.

· Dr. Michael E. Schlesinger, an atmospheric scientist at Oregon State University who studies climate models, said there is no inconsistency between the data presented by the NOAA team and the greenhouse theory. But he said he regarded the new data as inconsistent with assumptions that such an effect is already detectable. More Droughts Predicted - Many of the computer models that predict global warming also predict that certain areas, including the Midwest in the United States, would suffer more frequent droughts.

· Dr. Hansen of NASA said today that he had ''no quarrel'' with the findings in the new study. He noted that the United States covered only 1.5 percent of Earth. ''If you have only one degree warming on a global average, how much do you get at random'' when taking measurements in such a relatively small area, he asked rhetorically. ''We are just arguing now about whether the global warming effect is large enough to see,'' he added. ''It is not suprising we are not seeing it in a region that covers only 1.5 percent of the globe.'' Dr. Hansen said there were several ways to look at the temperature readings for the United States, including as a ''statistical fluke.''

· Legislative Action Sought: Coincidentally with the new report, legislation was introduced in the Senate today prescribing actions for addressing the threat of global warming. Senator Al Gore, Democrat of Tennessee, introduced a bill that calls for creating a Council on World Environmental Policy to replace the White House's Council on Environmental Quality. This change would emphasize the international aspects of environmental issues.

The US is 1.5 % of the Earth – with more than 50% of the world’s temperature stations. Statistical fluke?

(see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_Part2_GlobalTempMeasure.htm#historic)

In November 2009, CRU had various emails hacked and released. A CRU email from Phil Jones to Michael Mann, Malcolm Hughes and others, Mar 11, 2003, stated: “Even with the instrumental record, the early and late 20th century warming periods are only significant locally at between 10-20% of grid boxes. ”[http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=295&filename=1047388489.txt] So with only 10-20 % of the world experiencing warming, the US is not a statistical fluke – it is the statistical norm.

Hansen, Alarmist

Hansen said in 1986: “global temperatures would rise early in the next century to well above any level experienced in the past 100,000 years” [Miami News, 1986 – shown below]

Miami News, June 11, 1986

[http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=71XFh8zZwT8C&dat=19860611&printsec=frontpage]

In 2011 it is now more than 25 years since Hansen’s 1986 predictions of 2 to 4 degrees in the following decade. How’s it going?

The following figure shows global temperature anomalies from satellite data – 0.3 degrees warming since 1986 – Hansen off by a factor of 10. (Data plot from http://climate4you.com/)

The Leader-Post, Regina, Saskatchewan, Nov. 6, 1939

In 1939 they knew more than Hansen, with his 100,000 year nonsense. Hansen thinks the past had a relatively constant temperature; in 1939 they said “the orthodox conception of stability of climate needs some revision”.

[http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=w9EjUEod0xMC&dat=19391106&printsec=frontpage]

NASA 1999 – 2001, Same Data, Different Interpretation - Manipulation

[http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/]

From the above 1999 article:

So Hansen et al made the following statements in the above 1999 publication:

“absence of clear climate change in the United States”
“the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability”
“in the US the warmest decade was the 1930s”

The warmest year in the US was 1934.

In 2001 they reprocessed the historical data in order to produce more warming. The following figure is from Hansen et al 2001 [http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2001/2001_Hansen_etal.pdf]:

Superimposing Hansen 2001 (red / blue) onto Hansen 1999 (black), and highlighting some of the significant changes (the 1980s and 1990s temperatures have been increased and the 1930s decreased)::

What happened?

1934 suddenly got colder in 2001
1998 got warmer (as did all of the 1990s)
Colder years in the1880s – 1890s were warmed to reduce the annual variation
Manipulation of data became the norm at NASA under Hansen’s reign in order to increase the warming

NASA 1999 Predictions

From the same Hansen et al 1999 as cited at the start: “regarding U.S. temperature, we have argued (Hansen et al., 1999a) that the next decade will be warmer than the 1990s, rivaling if not exceeding the 1930s”

The following figure shows US average temperatures since 1999 from NOAA [http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html] The warming trend disappeared. Although CO2 continued to rise, Hansen / NASA’s prediction was a failure.

The CO2 warming era started in the 1970s. Where is the warming in the US?

United States – West Coast

– CO2 Warming Era Not Significantly Warmer

United States – Texas

– CO2 Warming Era Not Significantly Warmer

United States – Southeast

– CO2 Warming Era Not Significantly Warmer

United States – Midwest

– CO2 Warming Era Not Significantly Warmer

Climate Alarmists: Fail when it comes to the evidence from data instead of models.