Quote of the day:
The Earth has warmed and cooled over many centuries. One can get a sense of who is telling the truth about global warming by the company the concept keeps. Most of the disciples of global warming are liberal Democrats who never have enough of our money and believe there are never enough regulations concerning the way we lead our lives. That ought to be enough to give everyone pause, along with emerging evidence that the global warming jihadists may be more full of hot air than the climate they claim is about to burn us up.
Now that the Green Weenies are the "establishment", we need to find a way to invest the deniers with counter cultural cachet.
Bears repeating! (And true not only in this context!)
This implies that the “facts” of Glo-Bull warming lead to the fanaticism. I would say it is the opposite - The fanaticism of the Leftists to control all around them leads them to adopt what they see as the most effective vehicle to get there, Glo-Bull warming.
Glo-Bull warming isn’t a religion in and of itself, but it is one part of the current doctrine of the Leftist religion, which seeks to bring us all to their version of nirvana, which naturally would be under their “enlightened” tyrannical control.
The U.S. annual (January-December) mean temperature is slightly warmer in 1934 than in 1998 in the GISS analysis (Plate 6). This contrasts with the USHCN data, which has 1998 as the warmest year in the century. In both cases the difference between 1934 and 1998 mean temperatures is a few hundredths of a degree. The main reason that 1998 is relatively cooler in the GISS analysis is its larger adjustment for urban warming. In comparing temperatures of years separated by 60 or 70 years the uncertainties in various adjustments (urban warming, station history adjustments, etc.) lead to an uncertainty of at least 0.1°C. Thus it is not possible to declare a record U.S. temperature with confidence until a result is obtained that exceeds the temperature of 1934 by more than 0.1°C.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2001/2001_Hansen_etal.pdf
McIntyres discovery was a small error at introduced at the transition between two data sets, correcting for the error does not materially change the observed trends:
Its also important to understand that temperature does not rise or fall everywhere and equally. In the case of the US, as noted in the paper above:
it is clear that the post-1930s cooling was much larger in the United States than in the global mean. The U.S. mean temperature has now reached a level comparable to that of the 1930s, while the global temperature is now far above the levels earlier in the century. The successive periods of global warming (1900-1940), cooling (1940-1965), and warming (1965-2000) in the 20th century show distinctive patterns of temperature change suggestive of roles for both climate forcings and dynamical variability.
Here is the global picture:
Some people really, really want to believe that some major statistical error is going to be discovered tomorrow which demonstrates that such trends are a mirage. Its not going to happen these trends have been established on the basis of several different sorts of terrestrial and satellite data, and as the data has been refined data sets are rapidly converging. In this regard it's quite telling that observers such as the author of this article are reduced to claims that the increasingly minor nature of the errors discovered and the corrections made suggest that skepticism is increasingly justified.
Today's editorial: Cool it, hotheads (Orange County Register chimes in on the NASA error)