Global Temperatures Not Matching Warmist Prognostication

Climate doom? Yeah, not happening

(UK Daily Mail) The Mail on Sunday today presents irrefutable evidence that official predictions of global climate warming have been catastrophically flawed.

The graph on this page blows apart the ‘scientific basis’ for Britain reshaping its entire economy and spending billions in taxes and subsidies in order to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. These moves have already added £100 a year to household energy bills.

Let’s see that chart

The graph confirms there has been no statistically significant increase in the world’s average temperature since January 1997 – as this newspaper first disclosed last year.

And now the climate astrologers will attack the Daily Mail and probably talk about “cherry picked data”, Big Oil, etc and so on. Alas

Its source is impeccable. The line showing world temperatures comes from the Met Office ‘HadCRUT4’ database, which contains readings from more than 30,000 measuring posts. This was added to the 75 and 95 per cent certainty bands to produce the graph by a group that amalgamates the work of 20 climate model centres working for the IPCC. (snip)

The awkward fact is that the earth has warmed just 0.5 degrees over the past 50 years. And Met Office records show that for the past 16 years temperatures have plateaued and, if anything, are going down.

None of this proves that the Earth is not in a warm period. It is. The temp increases could kick back on, or they might dip, like during the time period from the 40’s to the 70’s. What this does show is that all the Warmist models, usually obtained using computers with little real world data but with notions that the only thing that can cause increased temperatures during this period are due to Mankind, are flawed. And hysterical. Over-the-top. Prognostications from carnival palm readers. And that CO2 (and other GHG) output from Mankind is not the main driver of the global climate.

The works of Mankind surely have an effect on the local climate. This is known as the Urban Heat Island Effect. Globally? Not so much. Someone needs to create a 12 step process to ween Warmists off their narrow dogma.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Global Temperatures Not Matching Warmist Prognostication”

  1. john says:

    Teach why do you continually mock the military of the United States. Everyone now knows that “warmists” is just a code word for the US NAVY. Anyone who looks at that graph can easily see that the overall trend is UP. Anyone can see that 1997 was chosen as that was an unusually hot year. Also Teach that graph is for the planet as a whole, the temp rise in the Northern Hemisphere has been much higher. And 90% of the world’s population lives north of the equator.Since 1970, the Arctic Ice Cap has been reduced by 50% while we have had only a .5C change in WORLDWIDE average temps. Gee Teach what is gonna happen if the Earth warms up a FULL 1C ???

  2. john says:

    And Teach 3% of the land mass of the planet is now urban, but that is only 0.8% of the total surface area of the planet AND the ocean is a much better heat sink than a city. Urban areas don’t contribute all taht much And more and more city roofs are being painted to reflect sunlight back and not absorb it to reduce cooling costs

  3. None of what you wrote proves global anthropogenic causation, John.

    And the UHI is not just about cities. It’s about land use. Please read about it before chiming in.

    And your Navy argument has been beaten so many times it’s not funny. No one cares. You aren’t getting us to bow down before the alter of high ranking officers that have been politicized.

  4. Justin says:


    1997 was the year when the warming stopped yet CO2 continued to increase, So we’ve had 16 years where natural climate forcings have proven they dominate the climate disproving the hypothesis that warming is driven by anthropogenic causes.

    P.S. You might want to stop fixating on the Artic Ice cap, Antarctica is much bigger than the Arctic and has gained ice when the Arctic was losing ice.

  5. Dana says:

    Can you imagine the outcry if the results line had exceeded the 95% certainty band to the high side? The sky would be falling, and this terrible, terrible news — we’re all doomed, doomed!¹ — would be trumped from the rooftops.

    But stepping outside of the 95% certainty band to the low side, the side that wouldn’t argue for monstrous tax increases and huge subsidies for green energy projects? Sorry, there’s no news here, no news at all.
    ¹ – At this point, our esteemed host should edit this comment to embed the video of Crazy Ralph from he first Friday the 13th movie, “You’re all doomed!”

Bad Behavior has blocked 7238 access attempts in the last 7 days.