Warmists Desperately Praying For A Jump In Global Temperatures

They really, really, really, really are hoping. Here’s George Soros funded Cultist Joe Romm

Long-Awaited ‘Jump’ In Global Warming Now Appears ‘Imminent’

We may be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures. There is “a vast and growing body of research,” as Climate Central explained in February. “Humanity is about to experience a historically unprecedented spike in temperatures.”

A March study, “Near-term acceleration in the rate of temperature change,” makes clear that an actual acceleration in the rate of global warming is imminent — with Arctic warming rising a stunning 1°F per decade by the 2020s.

Scientists note that some 90 percent of global heating goes into the oceans — and ocean warming has accelerated in recent years. Leading climatologist Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research explained here in 2013 that “a global temperature increase occurs in the latter stages of an El Niño event, as heat comes out of the ocean and warms the atmosphere.”

This is simply desperation on the part of the Cult Of Climastrology. And wishful thinking. What they’re positing is that all the “missing” heat that was eaten by their dog the oceans will suddenly start pouring forth. Their computer models tell them so!

Indeed it will be a very bad year for the Earth and for climate science deniers if 2015 proves to be the beginning of the long-awaited temperature jump.

Not really. Because this wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation, just what happens in a typical Holocene warm period. Climate fluctuates on Earth. It always has, and always will.

But, question: what if it doesn’t happen? Will this mean a very bad year for Warmists? Of course not. They’ll simply trot out more excuses, as well as blaming Mankind for whatever happens.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “Warmists Desperately Praying For A Jump In Global Temperatures”

  1. john says:

    I thought warmists were godless heathens? I didn’t know that they prayed thinking that would make things happen in a supernatural way
    Teach why do you think the earth is getting hotter?
    Do you consider Maggie Thatcher to be a warmist as she warned about carbon in the atmosphere back in 1984?
    Cult of Climastrology of course contains WalMart and CocaCola and most of the biggest companies on the planet (except for the fossil fuels companies)
    AGW is accepted by virtually every country on the planet.
    AGW is accepted by the USMC
    AGW is accepted by NASCAR
    AGW is accepted by the PopeI mean who is left but a few anti science people ??

  2. Phil Taylor says:

    The world may start warming again by as early as 2020 if the Sun is the main contributor. However it could also be as late as 2030 when the cooling cycle or stagnate cycle ends and a warming cycle begins. I notice that many warmer press releases has 2030 in the predictions.
    Even they know that 2030 could be a pivotal year.

    My main concern is that the temperature data is trust worthy. There has been a lot of conjecture and accusations that data has been homogenized or altered to give a warmer than actual reading of late. Satellite readings should be the most trust worthy as they have the least amount of people involved gethering it, and therefore less likely for it to be fudged. However James Hansen and Goddard have been accused of this back in 2008 of rounding up the data after they started to realise that the stagnate or cooling trend of 1998 was continuing and they no longer coud explain the lack of warming.

    My understanding though is that after a couple of years they abandoned this rounding up procedure.

  3. Jeffery says:

    Satellite readings should be the most trust worthy as they have the least amount of people involved gathering it, and therefore less likely for it to be fudged.

    This is denier dogma. This is not true. Recall the scandal with the UAH satellite data “modeling” by John Christy and Roy Spencer: “the discrepancy between the surface and atmospheric trends was resolved over a period of several years as Christy, Spencer and others identified several factors, including orbital drift and decay, that caused a net cooling bias in the data collected by the satellite instruments.” That’s not to say the deniers Christy and Spencer fudged the satellite data, just that they processed the radiation data incorrectly. To their credit, they corrected their errors.

    Another commenter months ago accepted and supplied this lie from the horrid Load Monckton:

    “… The satellite datasets are based on measurements made by the most accurate thermometers available- platinum resistance thermometers. UAH and GISS both show a huge warming bias, while RSS is closest to the measured daily temp. data. In fact, the UAH record is shortly to be revised to reduce its warm bias. RSS data also shows the 1998 El Nino clearer than the other datasets, providing an independent verification that RSS is better able to capture such fluctuations without artificially filtering them out than other datasets.”

    Clearly, Load Monckton of Bitchly, doesn’t understand thermometer technology and has even less a clue how scientists (eg, Christy and Spencer) create “temperatures” from the raw wavelength data from the satellites.

    You should be maximally offended and insulted by Monckton’s comments. He lied about what satellites measure and how. He failed to note that UAH is a satellite based dataset. He said the RSS dataset is closer to the measured daily temperature data, lol. If he has access to magical accurate measured daily temperature data, he should supply it, lol. He’s an absolute maroon, and the leading light of the denier cult.

    Satellites do not measure temperature, but rather record certain wavelengths of microwave radiation at various angles, and from that radiation data, “temperatures” are calculated.

    Satellite data are MORE manipulated than the thermometer data, not less. Manipulation doesn’t mean it’s not accurate. But the claim that satellite data are superior to thermometers is unfounded.

    I understand why deniers repeat the claim. You rely on a single calculated dataset (RSS) to support your false claim that it’s stopped warming or cooling.

  4. drowningpuppies says:

    Climate Progress? Uh, okay then!
    Both articles seem to be tripping all over themselves.
    In some paragraphs it’s mankind warming the globe (but not as much as models predicted) and in the next it’s the fault of natural variability why it hasn’t.
    The heat is hiding in the oceans below 700 meters but you just wait, deniers, it’s coming back soon and coming back strong and you’ll see because, because… uh, science and all.

  5. Jeffery says:

    just what happens in a typical Holocene warm period. just what happens in a typical Holocene warm period.

    You keep typing that but never support it. The 1 degree C increase in the past century is bad enough, but another 1 degree C in the next century spells real trouble.

    You probably don’t know this but the typical rapid warm-ups, eg, the beginning of the Holocene, progress at about 1 degree C/per 1000 years.

    Today, the Earth is warming 10 times faster than that!

    Do you have any evidence to support your claim that we’ve had rapid heating like this in the past 10,000 years (the Holocene). Is their some graph somewhere that you look at that is misleading you?

    Obviously, we’d expect to see just as rapid cooling. Climate scientists haven’t been able to find that evidence, but if you have it, you should present it.

  6. john says:

    I think it much more likely that coldists and climate truthers will be praying for some kind of supernatural intervention

  7. jl says:

    Do you have any evidence that we haven’t had heating like this before the Holocene? And you still can’t, though you desperately keep trying, to somehow compare warming rates. You’re using figures from earlier in the Holocene when obviously there were no thermometers, and comparing it to a period when we do. “The earth is warming ten times faster than that!” Oh, my. That’s only if you took temperatures with a linear projection out 100 years. The climate is rarely linear.,,and you have no proof that whatever is happening, will keep happening, and at the same rate. More scare tactics with nothing to back it up. And as far as satellites, global warming “theory” said the troposphere would heat first, but it isn’t.

  8. Jeffery says:

    you’re using figures from earlier in the Holocene when obviously there were no thermometers,

    So you don’t believe any climate evidence? Then how do you know if it was ever warmer or colder than now? If you only believe data since the late 1800s, how can you deny it’s warming?

    Your master (Teach) suggested this was just a typical Holocene warm period. So why are you obsessed with earlier than the Holocene?

    Why do you think CO2 dependent warming will stop if CO2 keeps increasing?

    You don’t think the troposphere is warming? That’s a very peculiar thing for a climate genius like you to proclaim. Do you know what the troposphere is?

    You present the flawed hypothesis that if it’s ever warmed before then the current warming must be all natural.

    That’s like saying cigarettes don’t cause cancer because there was cancer before cigarettes.

  9. Phil Taylor says:

    In response to Jeffery:

    >Do you have any evidence to support your claim that we’ve had rapid heating like this in the past 10,000 years (the Holocene). Is their some graph somewhere that you look at that is misleading you?

    There is a graph presented here. By real scientists at a U.S. senate hearing. You’ll have to do your part and watch it though to find it.

    “Rapid” is a great exaggeration on your part.

    As you watch it ask yourself where are the warmer versions of this?
    Why is it that I have presented you with so much evidence and all you have done so far is present two graphs that contradict each other, and supplied a great “chart creator” that supports my claim more than yours that there has been more cooling than warming in the past 18 years.
    My first email to you claimed the earth warmed 2/10’s to 3/10’s of a degree since 1998, and now months later your own trusted source suggests basically the same. You have not answers any of my questions yet you still keep asking me questions which i have answered.

    I have seen your responses to other issues that seem rational, and reasonable. However, on this issue you only make claims but you do not back them up with evidence. I am still waiting for the temperature of the Arctic. The name of Climatologists that you trust, and the answers to several other questions
    You ask questions, but you do not read the answers. Because you have already made up your mind. What saddens me, is in the unlikely event that the IPCC wins the day. You as an American will not benefit. As an outsider, I can tell you that you will not be on the getting side, but on the giving side. Stop trying to help those trying to rob you. IF AGW is true, IPCC does not have the correct solution, but they will have your money and that is only what they really want.

  10. Jeffery says:


    There were several graphs in the 48 min video. Which one supports your contention that it has warmed as rapidly as now in the past 10.000 years?

    I do have to admit that if you were interested in propagandizing for denialists you would bury this video and not advertise it, so kudos. Senator Whitehouse destroyed and embarrassed denier Roy Spencer with Spencer’s own fudged data.

    So you somehow think there’s been more cooling than warming in the past 18 years, yet the facts say it’s warmer now. How does that happen?

    Yes, I have made up my mind – based on data and evidence. If the data and evidence change, I will change my mind. What will you do?

  11. Jeffery says:


    I understand your frustration.

    I am not required to answer all your questions, or to answer them the way you prefer.

    You ask what climate scientists I trust. If you mean whom do I accept without reservation, the answer is none. I do trust data published in reputable, peer reviewed data, but not without reservation. I do not trust most climate bloggers and proven liars such as Chris Monckton. I do not trust climate bloggers who used to be tobacco lobbyists. I do not trust the output from foundations and institutions largely funded by the energy industries. Don’t accept evidence just because it confirms your own bias. Examine every bit of evidence to the best of your abilities.

    Real science has moved on. We’re at that stage, similar to the tobacco wars, where the denialists keep shouting “there’s no consensus”, “it’s too soon to do anything”, “there’s not enough proof”.

    Gravity and evolution, although “just” theories, are real. Cigarettes cause cancer. And the planet is warming from CO2.

  12. ruralcounsel says:

    You can’t extract short term rates from long term data. Simple mathematics. If you understood sampling theory, you’d know that. All you can do is make things up.

  13. Jeffery says:


    You can’t extract short term rates from long term data.

    I suspect you don’t know what you are talking about.

    Simple mathematics.

    I am 67% certain you don’t know what you are talking about.

    If you understood sampling theory, you’d know that.

    I am 97% certain you don’t know what you are talking about.

    On the 3% chance that you do know what you are talking about, please explain what sampling theory tells us about short term rates and long term trends.

    All you can do is make things up.

    When I make something up, please point it out. Be specific and we can discuss it.

  14. Fred Z says:

    Jeez, didn’t all those august people and bodies also accept that bumblebees can’t fly, that the earth is flat, that the universe circles the earth, that diseases are caused by ‘bad air’ (Mal-air-ia, hyuck), that Pasteur was a nut, that Madame Curie was not a woman because women can’t do physics, that there ain’t no land between Europe and Asia, that Indians are Indians (pretty good, eh? Geddit?) and that Galileo was wrong?

Pirate's Cove