4 Thoughts on “Think you know the climate?

  1. John Power on 21/05/2022 at 10:01 am said:

    That’s beautiful and amazing, Richard. Who could witness that and not be awed by it?

    • Richard Treadgold on 21/05/2022 at 4:35 pm said:

      Yes, isn’t it? I’ve never seen anything like it. Couldn’t resist posting it here.

  2. Tricky Dicky on 10/11/2023 at 7:14 pm said:

    I don’t think many people actually doubt the assertion that the Earth’s temperature is rising. It is one of those immutable facts from the information presented to us. Whilst we may have questions about the cause, there are few, if any, challenges to the fact that the Earth is warming. All the current doom of mankind comes from this assertion. So I asked a number of people why they were convinced that the Earth is actually warming in the first place. The answer was always the same. Everybody knows this and we have accurate satellite temperature measurements that clearly show warming. This is not open to question or to debate as the modern satellite record is indisputable.

    On the back of this absolute faith in the accuracy of satellite temperatures I went to the NASA website.


    Ground thermometers are considered more accurate than satellite measurements when it comes to tracking temperature, and here’s why:
    1. Satellites don’t directly measure temperature or the surface where people live. Instead, they measure the brightness of Earth’s atmosphere. Scientists then use computer models to convert this brightness data into temperature information.
    2. To make matters more challenging, scientists gather brightness data from more than 16 different satellites. Think of it like receiving a box of puzzle pieces without a picture to guide you on how to complete the puzzle. Experts face a similar puzzle-solving task as they work with data from satellites that were launched in different decades since 1978. They must figure out how all these pieces fit together to create a coherent picture of Earth’s temperature.
    3. Satellites measure the brightness of Earth’s atmosphere at various altitudes. For instance, they capture data from the layer of air closest to where people live, roughly the height where birds and airplanes fly. Scientists then combine and analyze these measurements, extending to about 23,000 feet (approximately 7,000 meters) in the atmosphere.
    In summary, while satellites provide valuable information about Earth’s temperature, ground thermometers are considered more reliable because they directly measure the temperature where people reside. Satellite data require complex processing and modeling to convert brightness measurements into temperature readings, making ground thermometers a more direct and accurate source of temperature information for us.”
    As it turns out, satellite temperatures, according to NASA, are not all they are cracked up to be. In fact, because the temperatures are not actual readings, but produced by computer models, then, in reality, these can easily be manipulated to show what ever results are required to support the narrative. After all, the majority of satellites for this purpose are operated by organizations that are funded by various governments and public bodies. The news outlets and main stream media this year gave us “Europe is on fire”. Turns out that the maps, covered in red, showing record temperatures, did not show actual temperatures at all. The Climate Reanalyzer department at the University of Maine had published a temperature map produced by, you guessed it, a computer model, but the main stream idiots ran with it anyway. A couple of days later, even NOAA, the US Government climate alarmists in chief, distanced themselves from this map, but the journalistic jerk-offs had already run with story, so were not in a mood to say “Oops, sorry, we got it wrong.” A very telling indictment of computer models, the same models that interpret the satellite data. One of the few independent organizations to assess satellite data is Remote Sensing Systems. They produce global temperature information from these satellite readings and are often cited as verification of the veracity of the satellite temperature record because of this independence. In 2016, RSS showed there had been no warming for decades and openly stated that the models used to calculate satellite temperatures were wrong. Having poked theirs heads above the parapets, they then came under a great deal of political pressure to get back in line with the demands of the climate alarmists. So, not for scientific reasons, but for political demands, the error range in the data was removed. The subsequent temperature graph then only showed the bottom of the error range from the late 1970’s to the early 1980’s and then showed the top of the error range into the 2010s. This skewed the graph to show a cooler past and a warming present, bringing RSS in to line with the demands of the climate mafia.
    Can we trust temperature data produced, not by actual readings, but by computer models? We have enough experience of computer models to know garbage in, garbage out.
    Can we trust the computer models that are produced by the same climate alarmists that push man made climate change in the first place and rely on this narrative for their funding? After all, we have a 40 year plus history of failed climate predictions, based on computer models.
    Have NASA, or any other organization, adequately investigated other possible reasons for changes in atmospheric “brightness”? Dumb question. Of course not. That could possibly throw a spanner in the works and we can’t have that now can we.
    As NASA themselves state, ground based measurements provide a more accurate alternative. So, we can’t actually trust the satellite data, but can we trust the ground based data?

  3. Tricky Dicky on 13/11/2023 at 10:07 am said:

    So, can we trust ground based temperature measurements? Are they less prone to tampering and manipulation? The short answer is NO. If anything, the ground based temperature record is much more of a tool for the climate mafia purely because it doesn’t need to be massaged as much to give the correct warming results. Most often cited is NOAA, but we know these guys are run by the US Government and definitely toe the line when it comes to temperatures. According to NOAA, their ground based weather stations across the USA have shown definite warming, without the need for much in the way of data tampering. Just reporting the “almost” facts. We have seen many independent studies that have clearly shown this warming is due to urban heat island effect. No need to mess so much with the data when concrete and tarmac will do the job for you. As we have seen on numerous occasions, many of these ground based weather stations are sited right next to heat sources such as car parks and air conditioning systems. According to the NOAA data, most warming of the US ground based temperatures takes place at night, strongly indicating urban heat island effect. We also have the NOAA practice of filling in data from areas where there are no ground stations with, you guessed it, computer models.

    Hottest ever temperature in Europe – 48.8 c recorded in Sicily in 2021. Hottest Day in French History: 45.9°C by Dr Jeff Masters, 2019.

    But just a little digging and you would find:

    “National Advocate, Bathurst NSW. August 30 1930.
    From Australian Government website

    Worst for 60 Years
    FRANCE. Thursday
    France is also suffering extraordinary heat. The Shade temperature in Paris today was 100 degrees, which is the hottest experienced late in August since 1870. There were numerous cases of collapse reported from the Loire region, where it was 122 degrees. The
    Paris police were granted special permission to return to the stations hourly for refreshing drinks.”

    Now I know maths is a construct of white colonialism, but 122 degrees F is 50 degrees C, so I would like to know when did 45.9 and 48.8 become more than 50? Britain had its highest ever temperature in July 2022. It was recorded at RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire. The weather station that measured this showed 40.3 c for a few seconds. It is situated next to a main runway and the record came just after a flight of 3 RAF Typhoons had landed on that runway in quick secession. Funny that.

    We know that mercury thermometers have been in use since the middle of the 19th century and it is generally agreed that, by the end of the 19th century, they were actually very accurate and stable. When it comes to temperature information collected at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, we can be pretty confident in the data, particularly as these mercury thermometers gave reproducible and consistent readings. In fact, these have been shown to be more accurate and reliable compared to many of the mass produced digital thermometers commercially available today. NOAA tell us that the average surface temperature for 2022 was 14.76°C and the average from 1880 to 1900 was 13.7°C. NASA, HadCRUT and Berkeley also give temperatures of between 13.5°C and 13.7°C at the start of the 20th century. It begs the question, where did these organizations get their year 1900 temperatures from. We know the main contributors to global temperature records around that time. We can look at the work of Dove, Forbes, Ferrel, Spitaler, Batchelder, Arrhenius, von Bezold, Hopfner, von Hann, and Bornstein, as cited by Kramm et al in their 2019 paper “Meridional Distributions of Historical Zonal Averages and Their Use to Quantify the Global and Spheroidal Mean Near-Surface Temperature of the Terrestrial Atmosphere.” They cite the 1908 paper by von Hann as the most accurate, giving a global mean temperature of 14.4°C. If this is correct, and the Kramm research shows that it is, then we have had 0.36°C warming from 1908 to 2022. That is, if you believe NOAA and their notoriously bad data. If we look at Temperature.Global these guys take a running 12 month average of ground based weather stations. Here is the entry as of 9.30 am on Monday November 13th New Zealand time.
    Currently: 57.33°F/14.07°C. Deviation: 0.13°F/0.07°C.
    Stations processed last hour: 58978.
    Last station processed: Karup, Denmark

    The historical temperature record from this data is:

    2015 average – 13.46°C
    2016 average – 13.73°C
    2017 average – 13.74°C
    2018 average – 13.26°C
    2019 average – 13.64°C
    2020 average – 14.00°C
    2021 average – 13.89°C
    2022 average – 13.74°C

    The blazing hot months of August and September were actually 14.22°C and 14.18°C, well below the NOAA average of 14.76°C for 2022.
    So, satellite temperatures, according to NASA, are not the accurate and indisputable record that we are lead to believe. If Kramm and von Hann are correct, then at worst case we have 0.36°C warming according to NOAA. If von Hann and Temperature.Global are correct, we have actually cooled over the last 100 years. If NOAA, NASA, HadCRUT and Berkeley are correct about the 1900 temperature and Temperature.Global are correct about the current temperatures, then we haven’t had any statistical warming for over a century.
    Temperature.Global use data from NOAA Global METARs, NOAA One-Minute Observations (OMOs), NBDC Global Buoy Reports and MADIS Mesonet Data. They use unadjusted surface temperatures. I know who I am likely to believe given the establishments shameful record of data tampering.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation