Skip to content

SEPP On Hottest Month Claims

August 31, 2015

By Paul Homewood  


Ken Haapala of the Science and Environmental Policy Project has a good summary of recent record warmth claims and the divergence between surface and satellite data:


Divergence: It is summertime in the US, and temperatures are warmer. Several readers have asked TWTW for comments on the recent claims that July 2015 was the hottest month ever and similar announcements by certain US government entities, including branches of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). These entities are making strong public statements that the globe continues to warm, and the future is dire. A humorist could comment that the closer we are to the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties (COP-21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to be held in Paris from November 30 to December 11, the hotter the globe becomes.
However, there are three significant forms of divergence that are being demonstrated. One divergence is the increasing difference between atmospheric temperatures and surface temperatures. The second divergence is the growing difference between temperatures forecast by models and observed temperatures, particularly atmospheric temperatures. This leads to the third divergence, the difference between the activities of what can be called the Climate Establishment and what is observed in nature.
The atmospheric temperatures are reported by two independent entities: the largely NASA-financed UAH entity at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) in California. The surface temperatures are reported by NOAA, NASA, and Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office, combined with those of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. These measurements depend, in part, on the historic record maintained by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Unfortunately, for more than two decades, the historic record of the surface temperatures has been adjusted numerous times, without adequate records of the details and the effects. The net effect is an inflation of a warming trend, particularly obvious in the US where excellent historic records continue to exist. The UAH data have been adjusted, but the adjustments and effects have been publically recorded.
The divergence between the temperatures forecasted by the global climate models and the observed temperatures is becoming extremely obvious, particularly with the observed atmospheric temperatures. The adjustments to surface temperatures lessen this divergence somewhat, particular with the latest adjustments by the NCDC, where superior measurements taken by fixed or floating buoys were inflated to correspond with earlier, inferior measurements taken by ships. The director of NCDC, Tom Karl, was a lead author in the paper announcing this change. As a result, we should see announcements that sea surface temperatures, and global surface temperatures, are increasing, although the increase may be strictly an artifact of human adjustments rather than an occurrence in nature.
The questionable adjustments in reported surface temperatures leads to the third form of increasing divergence – the differences between what is reported by the Climate Establishment and what is occurring in nature. The Climate Establishment can be defined as those who embrace the findings of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), particularly the assertion of a high confidence, a high degree of certainty, that human emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming. Simply because data is adjusted to reflect the IPCC view, does not mean that the IPCC view is occurring.
The greenhouse effect takes place in the atmosphere, yet it is not being observed in the atmosphere. The satellite data, independently verified by four sets of weather balloon data, clearly shows it is not. There has been no significant warming for about 18 years. These data are the most comprehensive temperature data existing and are largely independent of other human influences that bias surface data such as urbanization, including building of structures and impervious surfaces, and other changes in land use. Those who broadcast claims of the hottest year ever, based on adjusted surface data, are actually emphasizing the divergence between science practiced by the Climate Establishment and Nature, and are not engaged in a natural science.
Unfortunately, many government entities and government-funded entities are involved in the Climate Establishment. The leaders of such government entities and funding entities demonstrate a lack of concern for institutional credibility, no respect for the scientific bases on which such institutions were built, including those who came before them and those who will replace them, and will leave their institutions in an inferior condition, rather than strengthen them.
It is important to note that not all government-funded entities are so involved. The National Space Science & Technology Center (NSSTC) at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), which is largely funded by the federal government (NASA) is a notable exception.

  1. John Moore permalink
    August 31, 2015 11:28 am

    I was born in 1930 near the seaside in South Devon. It was always a standing joke among locals that August — and particularly the Bank holiday (which was then the first monday in the month) was going to be cold and wet.. “Welcome to Sunny South Devon — rains six days out of Seven” was always the standing joke among the locals. I am still only a few miles away…and I am told the high tides come just about as far up the beaches as they did then.

  2. August 31, 2015 12:44 pm

    Thanks, Paul.
    The real emergency is the Paris conference, with nothing to show and tell.

  3. Jackington permalink
    August 31, 2015 3:11 pm

    Speaking of “Divergence” This is Tony Blair writing in The Observer re Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters – they embrace “the politics of parallel reality…in which reason is an irritation, evidence a distraction, emotional impact is king and the only thing that counts is feeling good about it all” Replace “Politics” with “Science” and apply it to Haapala’s “Climate Establishment”.

    • TonyM permalink
      August 31, 2015 7:31 pm

      This is the philosophy of “Post-Modernism” applied to science. In essence, it proposes that since science cannot provide objective truth, then it can be used and perverted to advance political agendas. Howard Zinn, post modernist and purveyor of highly used history text books, said “Objectivity is impossible and if it were possible, it would be undesirable”.

      The lunatics have taken over the asylum. We may be doomed!

  4. TonyM permalink
    August 31, 2015 7:21 pm

    “The greenhouse effect takes place in the atmosphere, yet it is not being observed in the atmosphere”

    As Gerlich and Tscheuschner demonstrated in their 114 page thesis, “Falsification Of
    The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse effects Within The Frame Of Physics”, and summarized in Physicists Summary, Page 92:

    “1. There are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses
    and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effect, which explains the relevant physical
    phenomena. The terms “greenhouse effect” and \greenhouse gases” are deliberate misnomers.

    2. There are no calculations to determinate an average surface temperature of a planet
    with or without atmosphere,
    with or without rotation,
    with or without infrared light absorbing gases.
    The frequently mentioned difference of 33 C for the fictitious greenhouse effect of the
    atmosphere is therefore a meaningless number.”


    “The main strategy of modern CO2-greenhouse gas defenders seems to hide themselves behind more and more pseudo explanations, which are not part of the academic education or even of the physics training.”

  5. James Atkinsonn permalink
    August 31, 2015 8:27 pm

    I think the most interesting propaganda of all is the host of publications and journo’s that have no credentials, no scientists on staff, no interest in “diverse opinion”, and their only desire to read and repeat what confirms their fears or better their opportunity to sell their rags. I have seen several examples during this past few years, where there in print, the rags perform exercise after exercise to excite the masses, and as silly as it seems,many seem to quote GRIST. GARBAGE REGURGITATED IS STANDED TOME! Read GRIST and discount 95%, then know the opposite of the published word in “grist” is probably more in line with the truth of anything they print. Take this approach and you’ll most likely be on track with the truth. Advertisings excluded or it is more like 99.8% .

    God Bless them, many of the masses appreciate the bird cage lining and the third world needs the toilet paper.

    See Most of South America!

  6. 4TimesAYear permalink
    September 1, 2015 7:06 am

    Reblogged this on 4timesayear's Blog.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: