Bummer: Satellite Data For North And South Poles Contradict Warmist Beliefs

Sorry about your cult. Be a real shame if something happened to it (via Climate Depot)

(kenskingdom) UAH v6.0 (University of Alabama Huntsville satellite) data for November were released a couple of days ago. Here are updated graphs for various regions showing the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than +0.01C/ 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. For the second month of the climb towards the El Nino peak, there is still NO pause in the Northern Hemisphere trend. However, in some regions the pause has lengthened. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978. The entire satellite record is now 37 years long- 444 months.

The chart, which you can see at either link (I’m doing this post on smartphone), shows a zero trend going back 18 years and 6 months for overall warming, though it does look like there will be some warming in the coming months, thanks to the El Nino conditions. I know, I know, Warmists will screech about “cherry picking”, since they obviously a) have no idea that the data is working backwards from current time (Skeptics will understand that there was warming going from about 1979-1996), or b) intentionally obtuse and deceitful in decrying the actual data.

Here’s where it gets really fun. For the North Polar region, there is a zero or negative trend for the last 13 years and 10 months.

The South Pole? A whopping 37 years of zero or negative trend. 37 years. Let’s not forget, we were originally told that satellites were the best available way to measure warming. Which still wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation, but, hey, they thought they had something going. Then, the actual data from the satellites failed to comply.

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

6 Responses to “Bummer: Satellite Data For North And South Poles Contradict Warmist Beliefs”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Great! Global warming is over. Let’s burn more coal.

  2. Jeffery says:

    we were originally told that satellites were the best available way to measure warming.

    Is that true? The early UAH satellite data, which is highly adjusted, was originally shown to be “fudged” by Jon Christy and Roy Spencer, two famous Deniers. Their corrected data was similar to the simple thermometer data. BTW, contrary to what Chris Monktown claims, satellites do not have sophisticated thermometers, but rely on computer models to turn their wavelength measurements into temperature estimates.

    Which still wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation

    To a Denier, no evidence will ever prove anthropogenic causation, so why even bring it up?

    The evidence is convincing to some 99% of climate scientists, all governments, all scientific bodies, every major corporation, every major religion etc etc and so forth. In fact, it’s just the powerful fascistic American far-right who deny what the rest of the world sees.

  3. Jeffery says:

    Warmists will screech about “cherry picking”,

    Identifying your own perfidy doesn’t immunize you against the charge, LOL.

    “Gentleman of the jury, as they always do the prosecution is going to make screeching sounds about murder. Since they always accuse folks of murder, they must be wrong now! Ergo propter hoc! I rest my case.”

    Of course you are cherry-picking the data. Starting from current data, you regress through time until you get the result you desire! That’s the definition of cherry picking! Note how all your data sets extend backward through 1998 and stop. Why not reverse from now until 2000 and stop? Because it shows warming.

    Since 1979, the RSS dataset shows 0.122C/decade increase; UAH shows 0.140C/decade; NOAA shows 0.153C/decade; Gistemp 0.163C/decade.

    Since 2000, the UAH (Christy and Spencer) satellite dataset shows 0.128C/decade but the RSS computer model shows only 0.02C/decade. All the land-based thermometer systems match UAH over that time. Why do you prefer RSS? Can you give a technical explanation why the RSS and UAH computer models differ?

  4. drowningpuppies says:

    “fudged” by Jon Christy and Roy Spencer, two famous Deniers.

    As part of an ongoing joint project between UAHuntsville, NOAA and NASA, Christy and Dr. Roy Spencer, an ESSC principal scientist, use data gathered by advanced microwave sounding units on NOAA and NASA satellites to get accurate temperature readings for almost all regions of the Earth. This includes remote desert, ocean and rain forest areas where reliable climate data are not otherwise available.

    The satellite-based instruments measure the temperature of the atmosphere from the surface up to an altitude of about eight kilometers above sea level. Once the monthly temperature data are collected and processed, they are placed in a “public” computer file for immediate access by atmospheric scientists in the U.S. and abroad.

  5. Zachriel says:

    Satellite measurements infer temperature. Christy’s original published anomalies were contrary to ground measurements. This was largely due to faulty correction for satellite decay. Just as with ground measurements, the data is constantly scrutinized and adjusted based on the best available scientific understanding. After adjusting for this, satellite anomalies are consistent with ground measurements.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Satellite_Temperatures.png

Bad Behavior has blocked 5061 access attempts in the last 7 days.