Facebook Censoring The Inconvenient Truth About Antarctic Temperatures
By Paul Homewood
This post came up on my Facebook today:
When you click on SEE WHY, this comes up:
And this is the story the Facebook censors don’t want you to see:
Quite why Facebook would want to rely on the USA Today for its source of science is a mystery. Perhaps they should have actually checked what real scientists are saying:
Abstract
The Antarctic continent has not warmed in the last seven decades, despite a monotonic increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases.
In this paper, we investigate whether the high orography of the Antarctic ice sheet (AIS) has helped delay warming over the continent. To that end, we contrast the Antarctic climate response to CO2-doubling with present-day orography to the response with a flattened AIS. To corroborate our findings, we perform this exercise with two different climate models. We find that, with a flattened AIS, CO2-doubling induces more latent heat transport toward the Antarctic continent, greater moisture convergence over the continent and, as a result, more surface-amplified condensational heating. Greater moisture convergence over the continent is made possible by flattening of moist isentropic surfaces, which decreases humidity gradients along the trajectories on which extratropical poleward moisture transport predominantly occurs, thereby enabling more moisture to reach the pole. Furthermore, the polar meridional cell disappears when the AIS is flattened, permitting greater CO2-forced warm temperature advection toward the Antarctic continent. Our results suggest that the high elevation of the present AIS plays a significant role in decreasing the susceptibility of the Antarctic continent to CO2-forced warming.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-020-00143-w
I’ll post this on Facebook and see how long it takes for the censors to strike!
Trackbacks
- Facebook Censors Climate and Atmospheric Science Journal Study on Antarctica | The Most Revolutionary Act
- Facebook Censors Climate and Atmospheric Science Journal Study on Antarctica MEK Enterprises Blog - Blogging, News, Information, and How to Make Money OnlineThe Number 1 Online Blog Worldwide!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
We find that, with a flattened AIS, CO2-doubling induces more latent heat transport toward the Antarctic continent
They didn’t *find* it, they modelled it.
They prattle about “CO2-forced warming”. Considering this is minute to the point of being irrelvant they should look at the big-daddy of climate: Solar-forced warming!
What is your Facebook address ?
No mention of the 91 Volcanoes discovered under the West Antarctic ice sheet in 2018 I see.
Thankfully Jo Nova is pointing out what I have been saying for years. No one has a clue how many volcanoes, fissures and vents are on the planets ocean floors.
All of them are affected moment to moment by tectonic movement so quantity and variability of emissions are entirely unknown.
It seems there is celestial influence over tectonic events as well that mankind simply doesn’t understand.
Hot Scot, you are quite correct. We ‘know’ less about the ocean depths on our earth than we do about the solar system and the universe. Your final sentence is one that accords with a Biblical Christian view of the world: the old African American spiritual has it well: “He’s (God has) got the whole world in His hands.”
A standout comment Jo made was that more men have walked on the Moon than have been to the Marianas Trench, especially given the disparate distances involved.
gezza1298, exactly, quite correct.
Well there is one we do know about and that is the rock tide which the moon causes. It is not only the see which is pulled. It is well known from production data for oil and gas fields
It isn’t true that mankind doesn’t understand the link between celestial events and tectonics. Most scientists and the MSM choose to ignore it because it runs counter to the AGW hypothesis. The basic theory is that during periods of low solar activity more galactic cosmic rays reach the Earth, penetrate deep into the mantle, react with silicate rich magma and make it more unstable leading to increased volcanic and seismic activity. This theory is sometimes mentioned, with references, at http://www.electroverse.info however the older pages are hard to find as the site seems to keep being attacked by AGW proponents and the domain name keeps changing.
It’s quite absurd to use USA Today, reporting “studies” as proof. Are those studies replicated or reproduced? Have they been shown to be false since that anyway? Are there studies that show the opposite and so the question remains in dispute?
It’s just censorship, plain and simple. What agrees with the narrative is fact, what doesn’t is disinformation. That so many refuse to see this is deeply worrying. We re in an authoritarian where the state decrees what is true and suppresses what contradicts that.
Unfortunately you are correct.
There is only proof in mathematics and law. There is no “proof” in science only a thesis supported by statistically significant empirical data. This is how what we know this week can be completely superseded by a more compelling thesis and data next week. Also to call something “science” which the arts graduates so like to say means that the claim in question must be supported by statistically significant empirical data produced by a falsifiable methodology. How often have you seen the alarmists (and their propagandists the BBC) demonstrate “substantiation”?
Quis custodiet custodies ipsos?
What infuriates me is Facebook’s Section 230 protection. They are a publisher, not a platform.
Else, why would it matter that it be ‘False information?’ Why would a platform have editors? Why would they use fact checkers?
Free speech means being able to be wrong. Being wrong is a human right. Far worse than being wrong is not being allowed to speak at all.
Facebook is one of those wonders of modern communications which may entertain but seldom informs.
So true!
I was looking at the CO2 emission along with that on H2O and found that the water vapour absorb most of the IR radiated by CO2 as it was must more prevalent that CO2. The only absorbent of CO2 is about 20 micron or minus 73℃, which didn’t seem likely to radiate the earth via Radiating Warming (as claimed by Global Warming).
Then I thought that there was little water vapour in Antarctica so perhaps the CO2 might be contributing some warming, and title I said that the South Pole Station has been rebout several times due to snow (water vapour). So it doubtedly seem likely to heat the earth in many places.
Yes the electromagnetic spectra for water vapour and CO2 are very revealing. CO2 is overwhelmed by the signature of water vapour, only absorbing IR at the ultra low end of the spectrum where as water vapour takes the lot. Odd the “scientists” used by the political lobbyists of the IPCC just wave their arms around saying it is impossible to get an accurate figure in the atmos.
Facebook saying people are spreading false information is libelous, yes?
Don’t forget the various Antarctic temperature graphs at Climate4you, negligible/no warming shown.
So they “modelled” – using state-of-the-art Xbox science – Antarctica without a 4km high lump of ice in the middle and “discovered” it stopped having katabatic winds…
I’m impressed!
I recall a lady spokesperson for IPCC said that IPCC “owned all of the science and they had an agreement , no doubt paid for, with Google to hide all information denying Global Warming and Climate Change.
The bimbo was from the UN as opposed to being somebody at their global warming advocacy group, the IPCC.
Thanks
I’ll give it a go.
Full article has been posted on Facebook.
“The Antarctic continent has not warmed in the last seven decades”
Low Antarctic continental climate sensitivity due to high ice sheet orography.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-020-00143-w
Climate change and it’s renewable solution, despite the utter stupidity of it, is
now too big to fail in all western democracies. No politician will dare call it out or demand a first principles debate of cause, effect and response by committees of Parliament, or Congress. The amount of money and human resources spent on this idiotic concept cannot ever be called wasted. The amount of money made by Big Green rentseekers can never be recovered. The deceivers, scientific and political, will never receive any punishing justice. Censorship of anything that might threaten the narrative, such as Antarctic temperature realities, is the main game in town now. Keep calling it out Paul, I admire your tenacity.
Think for a moment if even one tenth of the money stolen from tax payers to fund this fraud had been instead spent on cancer research……
Or clean water for the Third World…
So many bodies who have no particular specialist knowledge select evidence as justification and call it fact checking, when they are in no position to evaluate the accuracy or relevance of what they use.
I note the passive acceptance of fascism.
Most arguments in above comments accept that it’s okay for Facebook to block a post if they consider it wrong. It’s not okay. Trying to prove the post was correct completely misses the point, ceding power to Facebook.
Facebook operates as a “platform” under Section 230 of the Decency in Communication Act, which shields them from liability for the content. Just like the phone company is shielded. When they started trying to manage content, they stopped being a platform. The law hasn’t caught up with them. Why? Because the Democrats were behind the content management! They weaponized it against Republicans. People argue, “Well, Facebook is a private company.” Private companies operating under the direction of government are government agents.
Enter St Elon of Twitter. His general instruction to users: “Y’all can say what you want.” Then he proceeds to lay off 85% of the snooping staff, down from 7,000 employees to 1,000 in a year.
And has records of former business practices published. Incredibly, government was intimately involved in the operation.
You can bet your last pound/dollar/euro that Dunn’s post was blocked at the direction of the United States of America. And y’all argue over whether he is correct.
CheshireRed likes this.
The 2020 Wijngaarden & Happer paper on Greenhouse Gases makes it abundantly clear that the theoretical expectation is that Antarctica will cool as the concentration of greenhouse gases rises.
This is fundamentally caused by the presence of a persistent strong inversion layer above Antarctica, so that it is colder at the surface than it is in a layer higher up in the atmosphere. Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations cause more radiation from the higher layer in the atmosphere, causing more heat loss and result in a fall in surface temperatures.
So the temperature trend map shown in the posting is expected and should be no surprise. It is notable that the Antarctic Peninsula, which pushes its way north into the Southern Ocean, is an exception, since it is exposed to oceanic influences, with more cloud and less of an inversion layer.
It seems that your page here has been hacked. I’m sure it used to carry the image posted at the WUWT article.