Posted on 05/17/2018 6:00:22 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
Inconvenient Science: NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Not that you'd know it, since that wasn't deemed news. Does that make NASA a global warming denier?
Writing in Real Clear Markets, Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, "global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius." That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.
"The 2016-2018 Big Chill," he writes, "was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average."
Isn't this just the sort of man-bites-dog story that the mainstream media always says is newsworthy?
In this case, it didn't warrant any news coverage.
In fact, in the three weeks since Real Clear Markets ran Brown's story, no other news outlet picked up on it. They did, however, find time to report on such things as tourism's impact on climate change, how global warming will generate more hurricanes this year, and threaten fish habitats, and make islands uninhabitable. They wrote about a UN official saying that "our window of time for addressing climate change is closing very quickly."
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Don’t expect this to be leading news by the MSM.
Another victory for President Trump. The biggest threat to human civilization has disappeared since he announced his candidacy.
Ping!......................
“Don’t tell anyone”, no worries no one will be told.
Great article. Will send this to a few friends.
Isn’t this just the sort of man-bites-dog story that the mainstream media always says is newsworthy?
...
I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation.
Like the MSM is corrupt.
Man made temperature swing or you guys cause seasons. /sarcasm
The mere fact that Trump has access to the button is causing nuclear winter.
I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation.
Like the MSM is corrupt.
When the FCC was formed under the FDR administration, he put one of his campaign cronies in charge of it. He made sure all the broadcast media administrators were in philosophical alignment with the FDR administration. By the end of WWII, the broadcast media was irrevocably “Progressive” in its DNA.
The FCC was formed in 1932. That is 12 years of hard core enforcement of ideological correctness by 1944.
Science is not a friend of liberals.
Never was.
Never will be.
Science is the reason that journalists and politicians go into their marshmallow majors so that they can pretend that they are intelligent.
Ping!
Remember this from 1975?
The Cooling World
Newsweek, April 28, 1975
[excerpt]
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects.
They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve.
But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies.
The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
The Cooling World:
http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
Original Newsweek article with scary maps and graphs:
http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf
Screwed the pooch on this one.
NASA’s GISS channel in question is looking at upper-air temperatures. If you put more greenhouse gasses (or manmade structures) at lower altitudes, you raise the temperature at those lower altitudes. Then the solar radiation doesn’t reach the upper altitudes to warm them up.
The reality is that the last two years in NASA’s surface-level temperatures show an unprecedented surge.
A small amount of global warming is happening. A significant portion is manmade. Much of it is urban heat island effects, and the undoing of the clouds of sulfur particulates, which caused the global cooling paranoia in the 1970s. Some of global warming is due to greenhouse gasses. The greenhouse gas effect is self-limiting; once the sky is opaque to CO2 at a given frequence, it’s opaque.
None of the pop-culture effects of global warming will happen.
Melting sea ice, like at the North Pole can’t raise sea levels. And you’d need to raise the temperature 100 degrees for 10,000 years to melt the bulk of Antarctica.
Global warming barely effects the tropics, but effects the polar regions much more, so no, the tropics won’t die off from heat death.
But as the temperature differentials decline, you’ll get fewer intense storms, because air pressure is the measure of energy in the atmosphere, not storms, and the air pressure will become more equal.
The real science is that the Earth will warm, maybe about two degrees in the next century. (OH NOS!) There will be more warming... maybe seven degrees... where we need it to be warmer, and almost no warming near the equator. Increased vegetation will make hot, dry areas more humid and slighlt cooler. Sea levels will rise from adiabatic expansion (that is, liquids expand as they get warmer), maybe about four inches. And fossil fuels will be obsolete far sooner than anyone imagines.
But... but... but... The NASA scientists failed to include all the hot air the MSM is spewing on global warming.
In our area at least, at the New Jersey shore, it has been colder than usual for longer than usual. By how much I can't say, since they won't report it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.