GOLDSTEIN: Feds scrapped 100 years of data on climate change
So, for all you who buy into the smash and grab called "climate change", get this: Climate is defined as: "The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) describes climate "normals" as "reference points used by climatologists to compare current climatological trends to that of the past or what is considered 'normal'. A Normal is defined as the arithmetic average of a climate element (e.g. temperature) over a 30-year period. A 30 year period is used, as it is long enough to filter out any interannual variation or anomalies, but also short enough to be able to show longer climatic trends."[9] The WMO originated from the International Meteorological Organization which set up a technical commission for climatology in 1929. At its 1934 Wiesbaden meeting the technical commission designated the thirty-year period from 1901 to 1930 as the reference time frame for climatological standard normals. In 1982 the WMO agreed to update climate normals, and these were subsequently completed on the basis of climate data from 1 January 1961 to 31 December 1990.[10]" (wikipedia). Now, read this article and explain how, if we use 30 years as measuring periods, we can have "climate change" with only THREE data points? How can you say there is "climate change" when you throw out 70% of the data you don't like? Have you figured it out yet? If they can't lie loud enough to steal your money (read" Carbon tax, cap and trade), then they just "delete" the data? Don't believe their crap. Investigate your data and facts.
Reading the text, I am correct: Temperatures were higher than they are now. Of course it does not fit.
I also find it odd that the "scientists" behind the delete claim that the reason was this data being "model-driven" .
The entire climate change hoax is based on modeling. The hockey-stick theory is based on modeling, by omitting crucial data, mind you.
Obfuscating phony bunch...
I'm not an expert, by far. However, I can make up stuff as well as the climate change experts can and certainly better than Ocasio-Cortez. Nevertheless, I have come to certain conclusions on my own based on my readings. The world is not going to end on some fictitious date in ten years due to some climatic catastrophe as they predict. At least for the last four generations, those generations have been brainwashed into believing a doomsday date that has come and gone. Every new generation, the cabal horrifies that youth into believing they will all die unless they do the cabal's bidding. CO2 in the atmosphere is such a small amount and effects so minimal that they are of no significance or consequence to climate, contrary to the cabal's alarm. And, the sun is the #1 factor in any climate change. Control the sun and you have my attention.
Finally, Climate Change cabal is a global organize crime syndicate. They lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, extort and commit fraud. It's a global money grab for those that support it.
The author explains that the current climate models are wrong because they fail to differentiate between the actual mechanisms involved and attribute to human activity things which are actually cosmological.
Most, people, even smart ones, don't understand the most basic facts, and these facts are well-obscured by the media and climate "scientists".
FACT - The CO2 we have as a greenhouse gas is not capable of significant change in temperature. All climate scientists know this. Try to get one to say it.
FACT - No model we have represents temperature change, without an effect of water vapor, and this effect is not based on physics, but heuristics.
We just don't know, and legislating on that basis is wrong.
Sorry, something about this made me think of this line from Blazing Saddles.
Climate change lemmings are grasping for any straws that they can find as they go on indoctrinating all of the little brains full of mush in our "schools".
https://youtu.be/m-pvJ00E8ZE
Within those cycles we have: Solar Maximum and Solar Minimum trading off every 11 years, then we get the 100year and 200 year surprises...like the Dalton minimum about 30 years in length. Then the 400 Grand Solar min/max year cycle that has an overall effect upon the 11 year cycles within it. Example: We are coming out of a 400 Grand Maximum cycle and will soon, (after this next solar max cycle) going into a 400 year Minimum Cycle: like the Maunder Minimum, Younger Dryas etc.
No, you can't get a proper outlook using 3 data points. One must consider Solar Cycles foremost along with Solar particle forcing, (which will soon be added to the climate modeling-believe it or not) ...but even then, they will still not have the whole picture, there is a lot more that needs to be considered.
In short, Mankind's activities, carbon/methane, nor environmental pollution has absolutely no effect on Climate cycles.
It's the SUN,.. SILLY!
Coupled With your info above, this link might be of interest. The head of the WMO World Meteorological Organization head is now going after climate change extremists like AOC. https://www.theepochtimes.com/in-unpr...
Very curious.
1) Great Lakes were formed by Glaciers that melted. Proof that the Glaciers came down to NORTHERN OHIO at one time. THEY Melted before there were SUVs.
2) The graph in the link shows that the EARTH has spent FAR MORE time WAY ABOVE the IPCC warning line (Red Dotted) than it has below.
3) During those times, we've had BOTH Warming Periods and Ice Ages. No RUNAWAY Heat as predicted, if we go above the IPCC number...
That's All I need. It's 1) Common Sense, and 2) A refutation by historical data.
https://www.screencast.com/t/fUnOOtEt7
Yes, such generational science can generationably be used to generate the climate change rationalized why of why we shall all die in 12 (no, it's about 11 now) years from carbon asphyxiation. This is why we must not be too racist to trust the Squad and to dump Trump to save the planet. By the way, people, don't you dare breed. Since it is likely too late to save the planet anyhow, making babies is tantamount to child abuse.