Todays Update : A look at the myth that is man made climate change, and how it is that we are all being conned.

Good afternoon all, hope you are all doing well. Time for something a bit different, over the last 12 months, many people have asked me to address the issue of man made climate change.

Given time is one of those commodities that I don’t have much of in the spare sense, I haven’t been able to, but now, with the nonsense reaching fever pitch, it’s time to address it.

I have spent nearly 20 years researching this subject, after the big 1998 El Nino I wanted to find out if this was real given we broke modern temperature records.

I now have complied 3,000 graphs and hundreds of links to counter this alarmism, and want to share this so you too can use it as I am sure you encounter these nutcases daily.

The only way things are going to change is if we see a big push back form sceptics across social media, at the moment, all of the alarmist community are on Facebook and twitter spreading lies and misinformation.

The reason for this is they are getting very desperate, as they know we are about to start cooling in a big way, as the oceans begin their descent into the cooler phases for the next few decades.

Most of the alarmists crew on the internet are actually paid trolls,, funded by Getup, which in turned is funded by the Billionaire George Soros. This man is purely evil, and wants socialism to spread across the Western World.

This move has nothing to do with climate change, this is about taking from the middle class, and redistributing that wealth to poorer people, from all parts of the Earth.

And it’s also about the massive kickbacks a lot of people, including governments, get from the subsidies that you and I pay for with renewable energy.

No one denies climate changes, it changes regularly. But to say man made climate change is real, with not one skerick of evidence is a bridge too far.

So in this post, I will provide lots of evidence and links you can use to debate alarmists with on social media or anywhere really.

Here are few dots points to start.

1 – CO2 makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere, a tiny, harmless, odourless trace gas, and it makes up 3.6% of the greenhouse gases on Earth.

2 – Man contributes somewhere between 1 – 3 % of this tiny number through the emissions of fossil fuels, breathing, and living life.

3 – Oceans hold 1000 times the heat capacity fo the atmosphere, which means its hold 99% of the Earths thermal energy.

4- CO2 makes up 400 ppm, with every breath a human exhales 40,000 ppm, something no one wants to acknowledge as being a factor in rising Co2 levels.

5 – The oceans are the biggest storage of Co2, and as we go through warming episodes, CO2 comes out of the oceans, due to the CO2 being outgassed as water heats up slightly.

6 – Ocean cycles change every 30 years, and there is a good correlation between that and the temperature changes at the surface of Earth over the last 150 years.

7 – Baselines are the biggest part of the scam, we have to measure todays temps against a baseline period, we are supposed to use 1981-2010 as the 30 year period, only a few organisations in the world do.

8 – Organisations around the world, including the Bom, are routinely changing past temperatures, to try to keep today looking warmer than it really is.

9 – History shows Co2 and temperatures have no correlation, CO2 follows temperatures on every time scale, in the short term by 12 months, in the long term by 800 years.

10 – Ocean cycles last about 30 years, and the Pacific and Atlantic drive our weather pattern, and also our global temperatures, as they change phases, our weather changes too.

So, lets gets started, somewhere a while back, it was all about CO2 making temperatures rise on Earth. This was easily countered by sceptics showing oceans matched temperature changes through the historical record.

So, the biggest thing you can point out is the adjustments made to the dataset, these changes continue every month. When it comes to temperatures, there are 5 main datasets used.

They are – NASA GISS, HADCRUT, BEST, NCDC, and UAH. UAH is the satellite dataset, it uses satellites and measure temperatures across the entire globe from the ground up to a height of 8 kms.

The other 4 are using thermometers all over the world on land, and then infill the oceans with models. All 4 of these datasets also use the period 1951-1980 as their baseline, with the BOM using 1961 – 1990.

The reason for the using of this baseline is twofold, the first is the world was colder as the oceans were in the cold phases, which makes today look hot, and secondly, they can continue to adjust these temps before 1979, because there was no satellites to verify the temps back then.

After 1979, we launched satellites and they know they can’t adjust the data because it will differ greatly from reality, so this is how its kept somewhat under control. UAH also uses 1981-2010, which is the Works Meteorological organisation standard.

Of all the data tamperers, NASA is the worst.

Once upon a time, GISS used to have credible data, and showed temps falling for 30 years whilst CO2 was rising, until 1988, when everyone then realised that the world was warming.

So the scientists decided the best way to get funding was to get everyone to believe that it’s CO2 causing it, and we needed to study it.

So they have been working on this graph above, it has taken them a long time to achieve this, and it makes it look like temps are rising with CO2 the cause.

Notice this still shows the 1940-1976 cooling, something they are working hard to remove, but can only do so slowly, as they don’t want to make the adjustments obvious.

And here are the adjustments that made this graph happen, since 2008, this is how much adjustments have made to the dataset.

All of the years before 1980 get a downward adjustment, and all of the years after 1980 get a slight adjustment towards. The way they do it is they have created a program that every month removes 0.01 degrees, which is why it has taken since 2008 to reach these levels, and create this scary looking graph.

They all do it, and get away with it, hoping no one notices, and also knowing that no one will report it. When someone says the planet is warming like near before, there are two things to point out.

NASA uses the wrong baseline, and if you you use 1981-2010, the warming is more than halved, and secondly, point out the data is heavily adjusted, especially before 1980.

Satellite temps are the gold standard, and use the right baseline of 1981-2010, and they show all of the warming and cooling without bias, because they measure up to 8 km high.

Every El niño spikes global temperatures, and this is because the temps follow the oceans with a lag time of about 3 – 6 months. You should point out that surface based datasets like NASA also picked up the Urban Heat Island effect, which is the cities getting larger and hotter.

This UAH measurements picks it all up, as it has no bias and measures everywhere, not just hot cities like surface thermometers.

Have a look above how well the Pacific Ocean, which measure with the PDO, matches up to the satellite temps, it’s almost a perfect match in trend line.

And then we have to read the dribble of alarmists who tell us there is no other fingerprint than humans causing the warming. The blue line is the oceans changing temperature, and the red line is the satellite temps, which follows the blue line.

The best site to see all these adjustments, and every dataset you will ever need, is climate for you, you can find it here.

It has everything from adjustments, solar cycle graphs, sea ice graphs, etc, it’s a total resource and has all of the datasets and all of the adjustments and tracks them every month.

This is the Atlantic ocean, we call this the AMO, and every thirty years or so it switches phase, and it’s about to switch into the next cooler phase.

Notice how strong the warming is in 1930s cycle, thats why the dust bowl trough was so bad across the globe, with scorching temps. Also, look at the period 1961 – 1990, see how cold the Atlantic was, this is why the BOM use use this baseline, because we are compering todays temps to that period, of course today will look warmer!

The Pacific is the same, this is the PDO, it too changes every 30 years, and you can see why we cooled after 1940, as it went much cooler for 30 years.

Use this graph to show why we cooled for 30 years when presented with NASAs heavily adjusted fake graph.

CO2 levels were 15 times higher than current levels 550 million years ago, and you can see form this graph they have no correlation with temperature.

450 million years ago, the Earths temperatures was 2.5 degrees colder than today, and yet CO2 was 4,000 parts per million, ten times higher than todays level.

In more recent times, the Vostok Ice Core samples from Antarctica also show CO2 following temps over the last 400,000 years.

One other inconvenience is that as water warms, it cannot hold as much CO2, which is why we see an increase in CO2 atmospheric concentration  every time its heats up.

Up above you can see the graph showing water temperatures and the CO2 solubility, as water temps increase, the water cannot hold as much CO2 and has to outguess it out of the oceans.

And you can see that here on this graph above, there is a 12 month lag if you narrow it down to a shorter time scale. Anyone who says we are warming the oceans from man made CO2, use this graph above above and the water solubility graph s well, and they will of course not be able to come back with a a counter argument.

Whilst it is true CO2 is going into the oceans, it’s not enough to keep up with how much is going out, because the warmer waters can’t hold as much CO2.

Here is a good graph showing the oceans and how much more energy they have than the atmosphere, therefore the oceans are running the climate by releasing water vapour into the atmosphere.

If you consider this graph, which shows the oceans a s massive skyscraper compered to air, then you have to also imagine that CO2 only makes up 0.04% of this air, which you wouldn’t be able to even see on the graph, thats how small it is, and then man only make sup up 1% of that 0.04%. It’s absolutely miniscule.

The other thing too also that in a big way disproves this theory is where the most warming is. And this also isn’t mentioned, and this is something I am currently using a lot when countering arguments about where the warming.

In the last 37 years, look where all of the warming has been, it has been in the Arctic, and Antarctic, and there is a very good reason for this.

Where it’s very cold, water vapour makes massive difference, and we know this because water vapour and temperature have a direct relationship with saturation rates, something Co2 does not.

Up above we see the table for water vapour mixing ratios. As you can see, if we wanted to increase the temperature from minus 40 degrees Celsius, to minus 30 degrees Celsius, we would simply need to increase water vapour from 0.1 grams, to 0.3 grams.

That tiny increase of 0.2 grams would then result in a warming of 10 degrees. But what if we wanted to warmth pacific oceans at the equator, which is 30 degrees all year round, to 40 degrees?

We would need to increase water vapour from 27.2 grams, to 49 grams, a massive increase of 21.8 grams! Thats is a massive amount, and something the atmosphere cannot do for very long as there is simply not enough water vapour available to do it.

So now, lets look at UAH again.

Look at both Super El Nino event is in 1997/98, and also 2015/16, and look where temperatures peaked. they peaked in summer time, always in January through to March.

Why? because it is winter in the Northern hemisphere! The arctic in summer is close to zero, but in winter it’s minus 40. Now watch this.

Look at the massive El Nino in 2015/16, these are the oceans as they looked at the end of January that year. Clearly you can see the Pacific was much hotter than normal, releasing a huge amount of water vapour into the atmosphere.

Here are your global temperatures for January 2016, when the El Nino peaked. The global temp according to this was 0.72c above normal, with most of the warming in the Arctic, its 15 degrees above normal.

The rest of the world is 1 or 2 degrees either side of zero, and balancing out. So this is also something they do not mention, its all about anomalies and not absolute temperature.

And look at it now 3 years later, spite a warm pacific in the last 12 months, temps have not risen above 0.30c the entire time. And look at how much colder the Arctic is, and the reason is without the warm oceans, the water vapour is simply not there too keep these temperatures from increasing.

So this is why we had an 18 year pause after the 1997 El Nino. The temps levelled off because we didn’t see any more El Nino’s that big.

Recently, they came out with a story that there was no pause, the heat was actually trapped in the oceans. And somehow, despite the 35,000 Argo floats across the worlds oceans, none of them detected it.

And of course, another period of cooling has begun, and the same thing is going to happen, we will now see another period of 18 years where temps cannot go above 0.89c, because we only see Super El Ninos once every 15 to 18 years.

Here is what it looks like since 1997, the big spike in 2016 need the pause, and its slowly crept back up. However, if we see a La Nina in the next 24 months, and that is become more likely, this will again flatten out and the pause will return.

When I get time, I am going to plot this and go ahead 24 months, by my rough guess if we stay below 0.30c for another 24 months it will be almost felt again, and then the pressure is right back onto the alarmists.

This is what is called climate variability, or climate sensitivity, and the alarmists debt thesis the case, whilst it is widely accepted the warming at 0.13c per decade, as we are, is well within those bounds of natural variability. This is the next thing they are trying to change, they are claiming its much smaller than that, just one look at all these graphs shows that this is all natural variability, and the temps are responding to the oceans.

Another scam is that the alarmist side like to tell us CO2 manages to trap the heat in, and it does with downwelling long wave radiation (DLR).

By keeping it simple, that means the earth is trapping heat, so if the energy coming in every day is high than the energy going out, then we have a build up energy.

And we measure this with DLR, the only problem is, DLR is decreasing in some areas, and not increasing.

Plenty of people have downloaded the data from the BOMs website, where you can plot DLR, and Cape Grim in Tassie is where the CSIRO take the measurement from.

DLR has been decreasing since 1998, which is most inconvenient to this theory, so lets look a bit closer.

On the left up above we see the shortened version out to the 3 years, with cloud, Solar Irradiance and CO2. As Co2 increased, IR did not.

On the right, you can see what this looks like compared to CO2, Cleary clouds and Solar Irradiance is a much better fit to DLR than CO2 is.

Alice Springs in the desert is exactly the same, so that means the heat is not being trapped in as the theory says it should be.

Anyone who says that CO2 has heat rapping properties, produce these graphs and say well the data doesn’t show it, DLR is decreasing.

Failed climate predictions, well where do we start? No more sea ice, floods and droughts increasing, tornadoes and cyclones increasing, bushfires increasing.

All we ever see is article and after article from the usual suspects saying its worse than we thought. Here are some great examples of failed predictions.

None of these preposterous predictions came to reality, and the one for the future about Antarctica won’t either. They forecast 3.5 million climate refugees will be living in Antarctica by 2040, which is the biggest joke of all time. Antarctica continues to be minus 60 most of the year, and up as high as minus 10 in the summer months.

And shows not warming trend at all, and is nothing more than a scare tactic. Arctic Ice disappearing 5 years ago, that also failed miserably.

The Maldives being submerged by 2020 was another popular scare tactic, and you know its a scam when they used the many donated to the UN to build a new airport 6 years ago.

Alarmists always use January, because its winter and the anomalies look worse, and of course it has been declining since 1979, due to the warm oceans.

But after the El Nino they ice is well up on previous years.

And in September, they are well up off the 2012 lows, and still haven’t got below 3.5 million km2. And they should now start to increase at all time frames, another data point alarmists can’t come back with, except to say it has been decreasing since 1979, which it has.

Another thing they also like to do is use extent, however you should always use volume, extent changes with wind flows around the Arctic.

Volume doesn’t, it actually measure how deep the ice is, and up above, you can see the black line on the small graph is almost touching the normal line.

Have a look at the difference to 2008, much less ice in the big picture, and look where the black line is the small graph.

When you hear Arctic Sea Ice is melting, you can say, actually no its not, and here is the latest Sea Ice volume, and you can say you found it on the DMI website, the link is here.

The most famous alarmist to be spectacularly wrong is James Hansen, as far as I am concerned, his is more known for being the planets best lookalike to Homer Simpson that you will ever see.

He has made many bold predictions, and none have been remotely right, and here is one of his stupid claims above, saying Obama had 4 years to save Earth by 2014, and he we are 9 years after and we are all fine and living perfectly normal.

His most famous one however was when he presented 3 scenarios to Congress in 1988.

So, he made Scenario A, which was to continue emissions unchecked, Scenario B, which was to halve emissions, and Scenario C, which was to end all emissions in 2000. Which effectively means, humans became extinct.

Given our emission have been at Scenario A, and then some, given Chinas massive emission increase, we should be at Scenario A, which I make out to be 1.4c above normal.

I have plotted the December temps on the chart from 6 weeks ago, both UAH, and NASA GISS, come in under extinction level. So thats how bad the models are they are using, they are over estimating CO2 by an enormous margin.

So what did they do? They have tried to erase this graph off the internet, a lot of Hansens work is now no longer on the GISS website! Luckily, I have always saved this stuff and put in mobile drive so it can never be lost.

Anytime they say its worse than we think, throw this one straight back at them and tell them to talk to the hand! Alarmist have no comeback to this one, other than to day using the 1951-1980 baseline its close, at which point you can say, yes, only because you adjusted the whole period!

Speaking of models, here is the projections form the IPCC, and the reality of where the temperatures are going, and whilst this is a very general graph, does show how far the models overestimate the warming.

So how do the alarmists set up so well? Well, they are funded by GetUp, a social movement which is encouraging the younger generation to speak top and be vocal about issues they believe in.

And the alarmists side use a website as a reference post for all of these arguments, and that website is where the 97% consensus story began, with a website called skeptical science, created by John Cook.

John Cook is a cartoonist, he has no qualifications in climate science, and neither do I, but I also use data and many years of study, he has studied at Queensland University.

Now on this website, they set it up in such a way that no sceptics could participate in conversation sea were banned, and they also set it up to debunk any arguments at all from the sceptic side.

So you are going to come across a lot of their material when someone tells you some story about why its worse than ever. The first thing too pull apart is the 97% consensus theory.

Here is how they did it, John Cook actually wrote a paper on this, and it was savagely torn to shreds by those people who actually look at what the paper presented.

Lord Christopher Monckton, the sceptic they fear the most, wrote a rebuttal paper and destroyed this in no time, and above you can see the conclusion.

The real figure that scientists actually agree is a much smaller 0.3%, as you can see they excluded a lot of them for not answering Cooks bogus questionnaire.

That didn’t stop politicians like Obama using it though, and they still quote it today like it is legitimate. It is amazing the deceit that they use and shows that governments are in on the scam as well.

So what they have set up is this, they call this the climate misinformers page. On the left you haver statements made by John Christy, who works for NASA and runs the UAH dataset.

On the right, they have. debunking argument, and you click on the link, and it takes you to a debunking article.

Then it take you to this, a link that has a basic rebuttal. Now these rebuttals, you would think they are written by climate scientists yes?

Well, they are written by bloggers from the website, people with little knowledge in climate data. This one is written by Gavin Wright, someone who posts on their forum.

But it gets much worse, there are two things here to point out. See above how it says best estimate is for temperature rise of 3 c with a doubling of CO2.

This is based on different scenarios, out off the latest IPCC report in 2015. What no one is told is, for temps to keep rising, all of these forecasts above include a big increase in fossil fuels!

All of them. RCP 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5. All of this scenarios are being forecast by increasing fossil fuels. So lets look at the highest one, RCP 8.5.

On this graph, look how much more fossil fuels need to be increased to achieve this 8.5, which is 4 degrees C rise by 2100.

They are running around telling everyone we are committed to 4 degrees warming by the end of the century, based on this absurd forecast above.

Look how much coal has to increase by, and look at renewables, it still makes up a tiny amount. This is madness, and this should become public knowledge, and the reason it won’t is because of the outrage that will follow.

The second point is, we know John Cook is dumb, not because he can’t use a calculator, we know that he did the 97% thing just by lying.

But as bad as his maths are, his security on his website is much worse, and in 2012, Brandon Schollenberger realised that John Cook had set up a secret forum.

What John Cook didn’t realise was anyone could see it when they were not logged in, and being the smart person he is, Schollonberger stole the forum and posted it online.

And what it shows is staggering, here is the where you can go to find this forum, the link is here.

This is where they openly discuss sceptics, how to write a rebuttal, influencing politicians, how Malcom Turnbull uses the website, etc etc. There is so much to see here you could spend Das trawling through it.

So, do you wish to know where the many people you online infiltrating forums and social media come from?

They developed a “Crusher Crew” and a “rapid response team,” and you can see the crusher crew thread where they discuss it all here.

The goal is to drown out any dissenting voices, and this still happens today, the minute some posts something on social media about something happening contrary to AGW, you straight away get 4 responses from 4 different people.

Still, it proves that is all the have left, they have no data, just so called scientific evidence. The conversations in these forums are amazing, in that they show how much collusion and work goes on behind the scenes.

So whilst I could go on and on forever, thats about enough for now, I will be finish by adding some websites you should look at.

The main one is wattsupwiththat, is will add the links so you can just click on the website. Anthony Watts site is the biggest in the world, and gets the biggest traffic by so far its not funny.

It’s also a great resource as many sceptic papers that are not covered by media are published on there, you should check it daily if you get the chance.

Populartechnology is also a good source of info, once on the home page, you can see a lot of info on the right hand side, including links to a lot of papers as well, along with other stuff like who John Cook really is etc.

In Australia, JoNova has a huge following, and she has a great blog site set up, make sure you read the comments in each blog post of these sites, you might even see me there occasionally.

She loves to show the corruption at the BOM, on her blog, you can actually search down the left hand side for the topic you want, and it has many post on each topic.

Also, you can use C3headlines, they have a fantastic resource of charts and images, and if there are any global warming nonsense being debunked, it will be on here as well.

There are many others, and they are all listed on the right hand side of each blog, WUWT has the best lites of sites to view. To really make a difference, number is everything because at the moment, these left funded alarmists are successful in drowning out sceptics.

But with every failed forecast, they are becoming more desperate, because they know China, Asia, Russia and the USA are now doing their own thing and no longer listening.

If only we had a leader/s in this country who would do the same, and see the scam for what it is, and not keep worrying about getting kickbacks, this country could be a great place.

Instead, it is being over run by a younger generation who want everything for nothing, and the left know this and have come top with a perfect vehicle to push this agenda.

No one denies climate change, climate changes by itself all the time, we have many cycles of the oceans, the Sun, the Moon, all have their little piece in the puzzle.

But CO2 is a tiny mole fraction of the atmosphere, and is a feedback, not a climate driver, and then linking man to it is even worse.

So keep driving you 4wds, using your aircons, and leaving your lights on, as the only thing its will do is make your bills higher, and have no impact on the climate.

Now that temps are starting to cool off, the balance of power will again shift. And by 2040, the climate will be right back where we started in 1979.

I imagine you have lots of questions, fire away, and I will answer them for you over the next few days. have a good one, I will be back later tonight with the daily update, see you then.

1. Thanks very much for that Av . Very informative, maybe in 10-20 years all the alarmists will realise they were wrong and have been misled .

   1. Thanks Jaime, I don’t think it will take that long, once the rains returns and the patterns change, people will start to wonder why and look into it more.

      Once the people realise what’s going on, it will be all over.

2. Hi AV very interesting read .in your reply to Russell you say “the message is that the dry years are almost done,we have one last period to get through”.
   Can you please expand on this in detail .Thanks.

   1. Hi Scott, yes on the Atlantic turns into its cooler phase, which will be in the next 5 years, it changes the way the weather behaves, and we will see a more favourable period of 2 to 3 decades.

3. Brilliant post Anthony! First class…please send that to PM and MP’s and key media…please. You have done all that work…you can be that one person that makes the difference!

   1. Thanks, yes I will try to avoid this at this point because the climate will bring them undone by itself, as it is no longer warming. Im not sure they would listen anyway, there are plenty of sceptics around but they focus on getting votes instead of what is really important.

4. Great article. It got me thinking of the cycles? Many years ago I followed a person from New Zealand (can’t remember his name) stating there was a 36 year cycle of generally 18 years dry and 18 years wet. Due to the the tilt of the earth and how it changes and effects tidal movements. Do you know who he was?

   1. Yes that is Ken Ring, he uses the 18.6 year lunar tidal cycle. The only problem is, thats only a small piece of the puzzle, and is easily influenced also by the sun and the SSTs.