When alarmists like Trenberth start the year admitting that not even all the adjustments made to the surface data will be able to mask the cooling this year – then it really must look like cooling in the data!
But I’ve already predicted cooling! Usually it’s a mug’s game predicting climate because we sceptics know that most of what affects climate is unknown and so the small part of climate which may be predictable is very easily swamped by unknown affects.
However despite it usually being something we sceptics leave to idiot alarmists to do, for a while I’ve been telling anyone who wants to listen that this year is more than likely to see global cooling because three separate (possible) trends are adding together:

• Reduction in sun spots (likely but unclear relationship to temperature)
• 60 year cycle is in cooling phase (cause unknown – but it appears in many records)
• End of El Nino (supposed to be cause of massive rise in 1998 – but similar scale El Nino peaking around now has caused only minor upswing in satellites – which is only reliable indicator of global trends).

Because all three are trending toward cooling this year, it suggests that despite being a minority of the effects driving the climate and whilst rising CO2 may add to temperature (but ever so marginally), the safest bet is certainly for cooling this year. My guess is that the odds are perhaps 60% for cooling 40% for warming.
However, now I hear through Climate Depot that even some alarmists like Kevin Trenberth have realised that there is cooling in the air:
http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/01/20/un-scientist-dr-kevin-trenberth-my-guess-is-that-2016-may-not-be-warmer-than-2015/
This suggests to me, that even this early, the data is starting to indicate significant cooling. In particular – because climate in the US tied to Democratic politics – I suspect, they suspect, that the data will show unmistakeable cooling before the US presidential elections this summer.

Implications

To be frank, the polling evidence is that most people don’t care about global warming any longer and don’t trust these “official” (Democrat) predictions so this apparent “change of heart” predicting cooling will be largely ignored as most voters already know the Democrats have been idiots on the subject.
But, to the idiots themselves whether politician or research – it will be seen as a disaster!!!
However, much more importantly, if 2016 shows significant warming – particularly if the credible satellite temperature drops below the “base” before the El Nino – then it would suggest the recent El Nino was masking a cooling trend and that would add credibility to the apparent 60 year cycle in temperatures.
If so, this makes cooling in 2017-2030 more likely. Indeed, the trend may be even so “extreme” that it is really noticeable by some ordinary people (i.e. real tangible effects – as opposed to imagined effects: leaping on any change that occurs and then falsely attributing it to climate).
 
 

From the express:

Out of those who voted by today, 31 per cent (2,457) said God would be responsible for finishing off mankind.
But those thinking it would be severe storms and floods caused by climate change came in at an incredible ZERO per cent.
Source

This is as good a time as any to comment on one climate extremist who claimed “they had won the argument” or another who said “the public were on their side”. The response goes like this:

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha  ….

On a more serious note – NOT ONE PERSON out of 2457 supported the catastrophic doomsday cult? Even out of 70 academics they found three who didn’t agree it had warmed last century (or at least couldn’t fill in the right box). So assuming that 3% is a typical error rate, one would expect some 74 people to have “ticked the wrong box”. Even if there were 20 possible responses there should have been around 4 people who agreed – just by pure dumb chance of misreading the question or answer.

However, it does raise the question of what will destroy humanity. I would suggest:

• We will evolve into something else
• Something else will evolve which will then kill us off
• Or as usually happens a long series and combination of events: Global cooling will make most of the north uninhabitable from cold, much of the south will turn to desert (as was seen before). This will massively reduce world population and concentrate it into a few habitable areas – then, already under massive pressure – with much of the economy in ruins and very few e.g. firearms, something like a new bug and perhaps some newly evolved predator will in combination send the human population into a spiral of long-term decline and eventual extinction.

I found this news on one of those insulting web climate extremist blogs which I read so that other people don’t have to.

Advances in thermometry

Michael R. Moldover, Weston L. Tew & Howard W. Yoon

The past 25 years have seen tremendous progress in thermometry across the moderate temperature range of 1 K to 1,235 K. Various primary thermometers, based on a wide range of different physics, have uncovered errors in the International Temperature Scale of 1990, and set the stage for the planned redefinition of the kelvin.

Nature Physics 12, 7–11 (2016) doi:10.1038/nphys3618 07 January 2016

Rather than fixing the scale at the triple point of water,
The International Committee for Weights & Measures
recommends using the energy equivalent as given by Boltzmann’s equation .

Current definition:
The kelvin, unit of thermodynamic temperature, is the fraction 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic temperature of the triple point of water.

Proposed redefinition:
The magnitude of the kelvin as the unit of thermodynamic temperature is to be set by fixing the numerical value of the Boltzmann constant to be equal to exactly 1.38065X×10−23 when it is expressed in the unit s−2·m2·kg·K−1, which is equal to J·K−1.

I’m surprised at the supposed “current definition” because last time I looked at this for the purposes of creating precision temperature calibration devices the standard was a hotch potch of methods. In some ranges it was based on PT100 thermometers, in others on gas bulb thermometers – in other words, temperature was neither defined by any fundamental physical relationship nor was it consistently defined through its range.
So, in principle I would support a unit based on fundamental physics but after decades watching the farcical non-science that has come from pursuing “theoretical” approaches to science which ignore the practical realities of what is actually needed, I am very sceptical whether this is being done because it is better – or because someone just feels it ought to be done despite the lack of any rhyme reason or improvement.

For years I’ve  been producing various websites and every time I start a new site I have to create a “template” that I then use for all the webpages.
For years, I’ve just copied and pasted what I found worked before – and the very first line of those websites contained a statement on the HTML “standard”. But like some gullible alarmist I just assumed that it was something I had to do and that if I “standards checked” my webpages that they would be “better”.
Then recently I inherited website. And when I went to do my normal “standards check” I discovered it was littered with “errors” – but these aren’t real errors at all!
But first a very quick introduction to html. HTML, is a way to make ordinary text bolder or italic or to suddenly have text
going onto the next line. These effects are controlled by inserting “tags” such as <b>bolder</b> or <i>italic</i> or a newline <br>.
An effect starts with an opening tag “<b>” and closes when the same named closing tag is encountered with a slash “</b>” … except for tags which don’t enclose text:

• <br> – newline
• <hr> – horizontal line across the page
• <img src=”file”> – an image

Continue reading →

With the El Nino about to end, with the 60 year cycle that appears to have given us the 1940s warming, 1970s cooling and the 2000s warming entering the cooling phase, with the low sunspots, and with the almost non-existence of any CO2 warming effect, all the known contributors to global temperature look set for cooling in 2016.
However – unlike the stupid academics who believe they know everything that can be known about the climate so that they know with greater than 95% confidence that the only thing that affects the climate is the very small and insignificant effects like CO2 (in other words the very small bit of nature which they personally think they can comprehend), we sceptics know that we don’t know an awful lot more than we do know. So, there’s a strong possibility , that despite everything we know pointing toward cooling that natural variation may throw the dice and lead to warming.
So, I would estimate the probability of having a predictable trend in global temperature in 2016 is relatively high, at least comparatively, but it’s only perhaps 60:40 or at best 70:30.
However, don’t expect to see this cooling in the fraudulent surface data. And no doubt those producing the satellite data are now under huge pressure to produce warming and likewise those producing records showing growing ice – under huge pressure to show it melting. So, we may only know it is cooling, by the increasing “tetchyness” of those asserting it is warming.

Happy Newyear

This is the last day before the family descend and Christmas starts in earnest. No doubt the evil people in NOAA and NASA who knowingly adjust global temperature to fabricate the warming scam and deny funding to important work that really does help people are rubbing their hands in glee knowing they have already manufactured another “warmest year evah“.
But it appears their glee will be short lived:

1. They are just fraudsters and everyone, even born again alarmists, know they are fabricating the warming, so it’s at best a hollow victory.
2. Almost every single indicator of El Nino is now trending downward, so it looks as if we have seen the peak and just as we expected warming on the up, so we expect cooling on the down.
3. With Ted Cruz heavily backing the skeptics, climate is very likely to become a hot political potato in the US and given the wealth of dirt to throw at the subject, I’ve no doubt we’ll see some juicy revelations before election day next year.
4. As it begins to dawn on the alarmists forging global temperature in the US, that there may well soon be a Republican president – one who is not at all willing to let evil public officials use their positions to push their vile politics through forgery of data – it will dawn on them that there is an imminent prospect of FBI investigations.
5. And as they are reminded it is a crime to knowingly fabricate data for their own advancement as they have been doing, the Republicans will no doubt remind them how long the prison sentence is for that crime. And as a result many of those who used to go along with the fraud, will see that their own career (outside prison) would benefit from working with the Republicans against their former colleagues.

As such, (for climate) we may see one of the quickest turn arounds. From no doubt, gleefully jetting off to some exotic location, (aka conference) to metaphorically open the champagne bottles in front of the press to reveal yet another fraudulent “warmest evah” claim, to a sharp down turn in both temperature and public support, red faces and growing hostility from the politicos, and then facing imminent prospect of continuing their career inside the State Penn, literally a few months later.
So, to all those alarmists fabricating the temperature data, may I wish you this last merry Christmas. But to everyone else: a merry Solstice, happy Christmas and have a great Newyear.

I suppose when your goal is for the public ignore climate, it’s good news when the media don’t see any point covering the issue. However, the fact is that today there’s even less news than before. With the revelation that satellites are the only reliable data, the suspense has gone out of the “could it possibly be true it is warming”.
Except in the US where it seems likely to become a key election battleground, the commercial media don’t see global warming as generating any public interest.
So, I will be attempting to get on with other things – at least until the next El Nino results – which will give us a better idea of when the El Nino will end and thus how soon we should expect global cooling.

Just seen this news. Ted Cruz is now cruising along at 31% support 10 points ahead of billionaire “bull-in-a-mosque” Trump. This kind of suggests to me, that if you have the courage to support unpopular but important issues like Climate skepticism, that the public will back you. But if you are a foot in mouth politician pandering to the latest public bandwagon you get dumped.
Source

If one were to talk about the cost benefits of sending journalists to these COP calamities, the return seems to be pretty low today.
The top news is that six times arrested eco-activist and fabricator of global temperature data Hansen is not happy calling it the Paris agreement a fraud.
But the green = gullible are clearly not singing form the same song sheet as the UK Guardian proclaims it to be “the world’s greatest diplomatic success”.

After the appalling Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris, it’s rather ironic that COP22 next year  is going to be in Morocco. And a very quick google reveals the following ongoing terrorist incidents:

• 2003 Casablanca bombings
• 2007 Casablanca bombings
• 2011 Marrakesh bombing
• Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group

Whilst the EU open borders policy is a disaster, there’s effectively no border from Morocco to Islamic terrorism. This article will be of particular interest:

After Paris ISIS Attacks, Morocco Terrorism Under Scrutiny: Islamic State Is North African Country’s Latest Terror Threat

After the alleged mastermind behind Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris was identified as being of Moroccan descent, police in the North African nation on Monday arrested four alleged members of the so-called Islamic State militant group, also known as ISIS, Reuters reported.

Strangely I’ve just gone off the idea of attending – even if I could afford it!
No doubt many civil servants who will be already engaged in the job of organising their delegation are thinking the same as me. We might see:

• A sudden increase in the number of climate diplomats deciding to take early retirement or finding it time for “further career development in another role”.
• A number of excuses being developed as to why there is no need for the same top civil servants to go to Morocco
• A sudden interest in “cutting air miles” by academics, commercial interests and other free-loaders.