No Global Warming for 19 years?

[Mudwall Gatewood 3.0]

Academic pedigrees and or titles don't change my mind.

Spot on, and they should not change your mind.  Their conclusions, valid or not, should however make you ponder, analyze, and scrutinize.  Assimilate this with your own observations, and then hold steadfast or YOU can change your mind.  Obviously some are more adept at this than others.

I have stated this multiple times before and it continues to baffle the hell out of me, because I have very good pals that refuse to even entertain the idea of anthropogenic impacts on our biosphere.   And they have all seen, witnessed, and felt what humans can do, and have done, to various ecosystems (the obliteration of a stream, the contamination of a river, the decimation of a forest, etc.).  If we can destroy a stream, river, or forest, then we have the capability to screw up a finite Gaia.  Are we?  Very likely.  I wish someone or something would change my mind, because I can't shake the notion that there are just too many of us two-legged upright avaricious critters walking the globe.

Then God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply. Let the fish fill the seas, and let the birds multiply on the earth." 

I don't believe we've been respectable stewards of the fishes and the birds.

[Michael Toris]

Both side are absolutely politicizing it and that makes people disagree or not even listen to common sense just because it doesn't align with their party's agenda. Too bad this is the future of our nation tho. We would much rather fight, get nothing accomplished,  and say we were "strong" in the eyes of defeat than comprise and get shit done.

[Onslow]

Gman, it's easier to bitch & complain, and partake in the blame game than to get shit done.  There is a certain societal malady that is the cause of this.  Its called laziness.  I'm sure you see plenty in your line of work.

It is a pity we even need environmental laws to begin with.  Civilians and industry should be sufficiently astute to figure shit out without some asshat standing over us.  Many Americans want freedom but only freedom to be slowtards.

[Michael Toris]

Yessir

[Onslow]

Anthony Watts?  WTF.  Cmon man.

Climate sceptics see a conspiracy in Australia's record breaking heat
Posted on 3 September 2014 by Guest Author

You could cut the triumphalism on the climate science denialist blogs right now with a hardback copy of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Their unbridled joy comes not in the wake of some key research published in the scientific literature but in the fact that a climate sceptic has got a mainstream newspaper to give their conspiracy theory another airing.

The sceptic in question is Dr Jennifer Marohasy, a long-time doubter of human-caused climate change whose research at Central Queensland University (CQU) is funded by another climate change sceptic.

I choose the Nineteen Eighty-Four analogy in my introduction because it is one of Marohasy's favourites. She likes to compare the work of the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) to the various goings on in Orwell's fictional dystopian novel.

The conspiracy theory is that BoM is using a technique to selectively tamper with its temperature data so that it better fits with the global warming narrative.

The people at NASA are in on it too.

Now the great thing about conspiracy theories is that, for believers, attempts to correct the record just serve to reinforce the conspiracy. Like a video clip of the moon landing on a constant loop, the whole thing feeds back on itself.

Correspondence posted on Marohasy's blog shows she has been pushing her claims for months that BoM has "corrupted the official temperature record so it more closely accords with the theory of anthropogenic global warming", according to a letter she wrote to Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham, whose parliamentary secretary portfolio includes responsibility for the agency.

Marohasy lays it on thick in the letter, accusing the bureau of engaging in "propaganda" and littering the text with claims of "corruption".

The Australian's environment editor Graham Lloyd was approached to cover the "story" and stepped bravely forward with four pieces in recent days covering Marohasy's claims.

Lloyd wrote there was now an "escalating row" over the "competence and integrity" of the BoM despite the fact that Marohasy has not published her claims in a peer reviewed journal (the two papers mentioned in Lloyd's story actually relate to rainfall prediction, not temperature).

Yet this matters not.

The climate science denialists, contrarians and anti-environmental culture warriors are lapping it up with headlines like "Australia Government Climate Office Accused Of Manipulating Temperature Data" and "Australian Bureau of Meteorology Accused of Criminally Adjusting Global Warming".

This evening the BoM has released a statement that explains the processes at the bureau. I've posted it in full at the bottom of this post, but here's a quote:

    Contrary to assertions in some parts of the media, the Bureau is not altering climate records to exaggerate estimates of global warming.

Homogenise this

The BoM maintains several sets of data on temperatures in Australia and the agency makes all that data available online.

One of those datasets is known as the Australian Climate Observations Reference Network – Surface Air Temperature (ACORN-SAT) and this is the one BoM used to declare 2013 was the hottest year on record.

Marohasy has been looking at some of the temperature stations that are included in ACORN-SAT and analysing the impact of a method known as "homogenisation" that the BoM sometimes employs with the ACORN-SAT data.

It's no secret or even a revelation that the Bureau of Meteorology employs these techniques and others.

On the bureau's website, anyone is free to lose themselves in a world of homogenised data sets, gridded temperature analysis and temporal homogeneity adjustments. Go for your life.

While Marohasy's central claim – that BoM is doctoring figures to make them more acceptable to a narrative of warming - remains entirely untested in the scientific literature, the bureau's methods used to compile ACORN-SAT have been peer reviewed.

Unusually, the bureau's full response to one set of questions from Graham Lloyd has found its way onto at least one climate sceptic blog.

In the response the bureau explained why three specific site records it was asked about had been homogenised.

At Bourke, for example, the station had been moved three times in its history. Detective work had found that a noticeable shift in the readings in the 1950s had likely been due to changes in vegetation around the instrument.

At Amberley, the bureau noticed a marked shift in the minimum temperatures it had been recording, which was also likely due to the station being moved.

Another site at Rutherglen had data adjusted to account for two intervals – 1966 and 1974 – when its thought the site was moved from close to buildings to low-flat ground.

Marohasy wants heads to roll [rolls eyes] because she claims that the Rutherglen site was never moved and so there was no need to homogenise the data.

However, the bureau has documentary evidence showing that sometime before the 1970s the weather station was not in the place where it is now.

The bureau had initially spotted a break or jump in the data that pointed to a likely move at Rutherglen.

Perhaps all of these movements of temperature stations was a conspiracy in itself, cooked up in the 1950s?

Professor Neville Nicholls, of Monash University, worked at BoM for more than 30 years and from 1990 until he left in 2005 had led efforts to analyse rainfall and temperature readings from across the country. He told me:

    The original raw data is all still there – it has not been corrupted. Anyone can go and get that original data.

    Pre-1910 there was not much of a spread but also there was more uncertainty about how the temperatures were being measured. By 1910, most temperatures were being measured in a Stevenson Screen. A lot of measurements were taken at Post Offices but in many cases these were moved out to airports around the middle of the 20th century. That produces artificial cooling in the data.

    Towns for example in coastal New South Wales originally had temperatures taken near the ocean because that's where the town was. But as the town grew the observations would move inland and that is enough to affect temperature and rainfall.

    Are we supposed to just ignore that? A scientist can't ignore those effects. It's not science to just go ahead and plot that raw data.

Nicholls said if people didn't trust the way the BoM was presenting the data they could look elsewhere, such as a major project known as Berkeley Earth undertaken by former sceptic Professor Richard Muller which also used BoM data from as early as 1852 to mid-2013.

A chart showing Australia's warming trend from the Berkeley Earth project A chart from the Berkeley Earth analysis of global temperatures used data from the Bureau of Meteorology to reconstruct average temperatures for Australia going back to 1852. Photograph: Berkeley Earth
Sceptic funding

Before joining CQU, Marohasy spent many years working at the Institute of Public Affairs – a Melbourne-based free market think tank that has been promoting climate science denialism for more than two decades.

After leaving there, she became the chair of the Australian Environment Foundation, a spin-off from the IPA.

Marohasy has said that Bryant Macfie, a Perth-based climate science sceptic, funds her research at Central Queensland University.

In 2008, after Macfie had gifted $350,000 to the University of Queensland in a donation facilitated by the IPA to pay for environmental research scholarships there, he wrote that science had been corrupted by a "newer religion" of environmentalism.

In June, Marohasy made her claims about BoM to the Sydney Institute. In July she travelled to Las Vegas to speak at the Heartland Institute's gathering of climate science denialists and assorted contrarians.

The Heartland Institute is the "free market" think tank that once ran a billboard advert with a picture of terrorist and murderer Ted "Unabomber" Kaczynski alongside the question: "I still believe in Global Warming. Do You?"

Also speaking in Las Vegas was federal MP for the Queensland electorate of Dawson, George Christensen, who appeared on a panel alongside Marohasy.

Christensen described mainstream climate science as "a lot of fiction dressed up as science".
Data shows warming

Dr Lisa Alexander, the chief investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, explained that in Australia it was not uncommon for temperature stations to be moved, often away from urban environments.

She said that, for example, sites moved only a kilometre or so to more exposed areas such as airports would tend to record lower temperatures.

Click here to read the rest

0 0

Bookmark and Share
Printable Version  |  Link to this page
Comments

Comments 1 to 2:

    Tom Curtis at 03:59 AM on 4 September, 2014

    Here is the timeseries of all datasets used for comparison to the ACORN series for quality control, as shown below the fold in the article above:

    Of particular interest are the Torok and Nicholls (TN, in gold) dataset, used by BOM prior to the development of the ACORN dataset; the Australian Water Availability Project (AWAP, in yellow) which is not homogenized, and the Whole Network Drift Corrected (WNDC, in yellowy green) dataset, which is also not homogenized.  BOM has published an analysis of trends using the range of avialable datasets shown above, and from which the graph above comes.  In it, on table 1 we learn that the total quadratic change from 1911-2010 was 0.98 C for Torok and Nicholls, which was reduced to 0.94 C by in the ACORN dataset.  That is, by replacing the old analysis with a more recent analysis, BOM has decreased its estimate of total warming in Australia over the last century.  Both, however, are still higher than the 0.69 C increase shown by AWAP. 

    Data homogenization does increase the estimated temperture increase over the century.  That, however, is not an intended effect, and the techniques used for data homogenization are blind to their effect on the trend.  They make adjustments which decrease the trend almost as often as they make adjustments that increase the trend.   It just happens to be the case that when you correct the record for data quality without regard of the effects on the trend, the trend happens to increase.
    0 0
    doug_bostrom at 08:26 AM on 4 September, 2014

    Marohasy's the same highly imaginative person who detected a plot by ABC to cut off her interview midstream and replace her with the notorious, ubiquitous John Cook.    

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sceptics-conspiracy-australia-record-heat.html

[benben reincarnated]

Was glad to see this today:

http://www.thesylvaherald.com/breaking_news/article_e827242a-337e-11e4-ade6-0017a43b2370.html

[Michael Toris]

Was glad to see this today:

http://www.thesylvaherald.com/breaking_news/article_e827242a-337e-11e4-ade6-0017a43b2370.html

"There have been some geologic studies that indicated the requisite organic –rich rocks might underlie parts of the Blue Ridge, but if so, getting to them would require substantial drilling."

That shit made my stomach turn. Damn this shit scares me to death

[Grannyknot]

One good thing about global warming....
You can now board a luxury cruise ship for a tour of the northwest passage.
Cost is a meager $20k.

[Michael Toris]

Looking at a few days or even a few years of data doesn't really tell us anything about climatic change as the scientific theory is based on thousands of years of climatic data.

[Michael Toris]

Pretty much what I am thinking, but it seems to me  CO2 leads to cooling... volcanoes-ice age?

It can, in the grand scheme of things. Warm ocean currents become interrupted by cold water from melted ice caps. These ocean currents drive weather

[Onslow]

Pretty much what I am thinking, but it seems to me  CO2 leads to cooling... volcanoes-ice age?

The last time Co2 levels were supposedly at 400 ppm.

   

The last time carbon dioxide concentrations were around 400ppm: a snapshot from Arctic Siberia
Posted on 14 May 2013 by John Mason
Synopsis

During the late Pliocene and early Pleistocene Series of the Cenozoic Era, 3.6 to 2.2 Ma (million years ago), the Arctic was much warmer than it is at the present day (with summer temperatures from 3.6-3.4 Ma some 8oC warmer than today). That is a key finding of research into a lake-sediment core obtained in Eastern Siberia, which is of exceptional importance because it has provided the longest continuous late Cenozoic land-based sedimentary record thus far. The sedimentary sequence dates from recent times back to 3.6 Ma when the lake was formed by a large extraterrestrial impact. During the warm period, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations were close to those of today, at around 400 parts per million, indicative of a strong climate sensitivity signal in the Arctic, which has again warmed very rapidly in recent decades. The lake sediment record has thus provided us with a snapshot of how the Arctic may look in the near future.
Introduction

Geologists divide geological time into Eons (the longest divisions), Eras, Systems and Series. The Pliocene (5.333-2.588 Ma) is the final Series of the Neogene System and the Pleistocene (2.588 Ma-11,700 years ago) is the first Series of the Quaternary System, both being part of the Cenozoic Era, the latest Era of the Phanerozoic Eon.

Just to get that into context, here is all of geological time plotted against the human 12-month calendar year, so that geological time starts on the first second of New Years' Day and the present is the last second of New Years' Eve. On such a scale, the whole Cenozoic Era equates to a tiny bit of late December!

All of Geological time plotted against the human year



So let's zoom in by doing the same exercise just with the Cenozoic Era. Now the Pliocene and Pleistocene Series occupy December, although the most recent Series, the Holocene - from 11,700 years ago to now - is such a short timeframe that it remains invisible in among the last seconds of New Years' Eve!



Geological time plotted against the human year: Cenozoic Era

Numbers: millions of years ago. Data: International Commission on Stratigraphy. Graphics: author.

To set the scene, the Pliocene and Pleistocene Earth had a very similar geography to that of the present day in terms of the distribution of continents, with the closure of the Panama Isthmus, forming a land-bridge between North and South America, being a significant development around 3 Ma. The cooling climatic trend that had been underway since the early Oligocene (33 Ma) continued down into the alternating series of glacials and interglacials later in the Pleistocene. Pliocene and early Pleistocene sea levels were significantly higher than those of the present day, with marine sedimentary rocks belonging to this time occurring on land in various parts of the world. Here in the UK, the lower Pleistocene Red Crag Formation, with a well-preserved fossil fauna of bivalves and other shells, many of familiar types, forms extensive cliffs along parts of the East Anglia coast, bearing testament to those higher sea-levels.

Lower Pleistocene marine sediments - Red Crag Formation, Walton on the Naze, Suffolk

above: landslip-prone cliffs of lower Pleistocene Red Crag Formation, Walton-on-the-Naze, Suffolk, UK. Photo: author.

The cooling occurred gradually and in a stepped fashion. Warmer and cooler periods, but with an overall cooling trend, occurred throughout the Pliocene and up until the so-called Mid-Pleistocene Transition on cycles of ~41,000 years: the cyclic pattern being due to orbital or Milankovitch Cycles. Following the Mid-Pleistocene Transition, a 100,000 year glacial-interglacial cycle predominated.

The cyclic, alternating warm and cool periods each left their mark on the marine oxygen isotope record, something that was first predicted in a 1947 paper by chemist and paleoclimatology pioneer Harold Urey. Oceanic sediment cores show that the ratios of the isotopes oxygen 16 and 18, as measured in the calcite shells of fossil foraminifera, vary through geological time with temperature. This is because oxygen 16 (in water vapour) is more easily lost to the atmosphere during ocean evaporation: in turn, during cold cycles, much more of it gets trapped in snow and ice. Hence, the O16/18 ratio varies at any given time depending on the volume of ice present on the planet.

Via the detailed record of warm and cool climatic stages that has been reconstructed using oxygen isotope data going back through time, each warm or cool period has been given a Marine Isotope Stage number, starting with the present Interglacial, which is Marine Isotope Stage 1. Because the sequence begins with a warm stage, other warm stages have odd numbers and cool stages have even numbers. It's worth mentioning what these Stages are because they are referenced so frequently in the research itself.
The research: Pliocene Warmth, Polar Amplification and Stepped Pleistocene Cooling Recorded in NE Arctic Russia

Lake El'gygytgyn, pronounced El-Guh-Git-Kin (but commonly called 'Lake E'!) is located in the northeast Russian Arctic, 100 kilometres north of the Arctic Circle. It was formed at 3.6 Ma when an extraterrestrial object estimated to be about 1km in diameter impacted, blasting out a crater some 18 kilometres in width. After the impact, the crater filled with water and sedimentation commenced. The lake is up to 170m deep and beneath its floor there occur bedded lake sediments some 300m in thickness that cover the impact-shattered volcanic rocks (termed impact-breccia), of Cretaceous age. For a detailed geological description of the crater, the following reference gives an interesting read:

http://www.geo.umass.edu/lake_e/publications/Gutrov2007.pdf

Skeptical Science has covered research at this lake before here, but on May 9th 2013 a new paper was published in the journal Science that gives more details of the core and the paleoclimatic evidence it is yielding up. Written by an international team (lead writer: Julie Brigham-Grette of the University of Massachusetts Amherst), the paper describes how drilling was done from an artificially-thickened ice-platform on the lake early in 2009, with resultant cores covering a complete 3.6 million year record spanning 318m of sediments. That is an impressive accomplishment: the record preserved by the Greenland ice, as sampled by ice-coring, stretches back no more than ca. 140,000 years.

The drilling rig

above: the 100-ton drilling-rig on the lake. The ice had to be artificially thickened to over 2m in order to safely take the weight. Photo: Jens Karls.

The part of Siberian Russia in which the lake is situated is one of the few areas of the Arctic that were not glaciated (and thereby glacially eroded) during the later Pleistocene glaciations. This is why the sedimentary record is so well-preserved at 'Lake E': glaciers are thuggish things that move lots of boulders and other heavy debris around, so only non-glaciated environments have much chance of staying undisturbed for such a long time.

The drillcore revealed that the lake sediments are pelagic in nature, i.e. they were deposited very slowly as fine, clay-sized sediment particles settled out of suspension. Think of how a muddly puddle slowly clears up if left undisturbed and you have the picture. Sediment would have been supplied via the streams that flow into the lake and by windblown dust.

For the first ca. 20,000 years following the impact, the sediments reveal few signs of life, but after that there exists a rich assemblage of fossil pollen. The pollen allowed the team to reconstruct the types of vegetation living around the lake, and how it changed through time in response to changes in temperatures and precipitation. Many plants that thrived there in the past, such as the Douglas Fir and Hemlock that are typical of Boreal forests, do not do so today: the area is currently tundra dominated by mosses with stunted trees such as prostrate willow and dwarf birch and is underlain by permafrost.

Lake El'gygytgyn

above: Lake El'gygytgyn in the summer. Photo: Julie Brigham-Grette

The paper reports that the pollen reconstructions show that the climate of the area in the  middle Pliocene, between 3.6 to 3.4 Ma, was much warmer than that of today. The mean temperature of the warmest month of the year was +15-16oC compared to +8oC today. Rainfall, indicated by the influx rates of sediment, was also substantially greater in the past at 600mm/year compared to the 200m/yr average of today.

Cooling events did occur during the late Pliocene: the largest occurred between 3.31 and 3.28 Ma, when steppe-like habitats developed around the lake. This event, a punctuation mark in the overall warm theme, is thought to have been related to a period in which the influence of the North Atlantic Current declined significantly. However, from 3.26 to 2.6 Ma, warm and moist conditions prevailed, with warmest month temperatures 3-6oC greater than those of today.

sediment cores from 'Lake E'

above: sections of drillcore from Lake El'gygytgyn. Five distinct facies (sediments with specific sets of characteristics) are present. Facies A, only noted at intervals during the Pleistocene, was deposited in the presence of perennial lake-ice cover.  Facies D and E are restricted to the Pliocene. Image from the supplementary material for Brigham-Grette et al, 2013.

The first sign in the lake sediments of cyclic cold spells (glacials), driven by changes in insolation via the orbital Milankovitch Cycles, appears at 2.6 Ma, with such conditions becoming relatively common from 2.3 Ma onwards. The indicator is a change in sediment characteristics (termed 'facies') indicative of the periodic development of year-round lake ice-cover. However, only from 1.8 Ma onwards do all cold cycles produce sediments indicative of perennial ice cover. Thus, the transition from the warmth of the Pliocene down into the cold of the later Pleistocene occurred in a stepwise fashion. The stepwise pattern was also reflected by the vegetation: conifers disappear from the record at 2.71-2.69 Ma and the period 2.6 through to 2.53 Ma saw the transition from forest to a treeless, shrubby environment as the protracted warmth came to an end. By 2.2 Ma, Arctic summers during the warm cycles were - predominantly - no warmer than at present.

That these initial cold cycles were not as drastic as those later in the Pleistocene is also evidenced by sea level variability across individual cycles of only ~70m, compared with ~125m for Marine Isotope Stage 2 - the last glacial maximum.

Another interesting discovery that warrants inclusion in this piece, although it features in an older (2012) paper by the same team, is that 'Lake E' also records the fact that during the Pleistocene there occurred a number of 'super-interglacials'. An example is Marine Isotope Stage 31 which occurred at about 1.07 Ma and in which temperatures in the area were some 4-5oC warmer than present. Climate simulations have difficulty in producing such a degree of warmth with the then greenhouse gas and orbital (Milankovitch) forcings alone, suggesting there must be some other factor at work, such as amplifying feedbacks.

The fact that the sheer amount of Arctic warming that occurred exceeds that simulated by climate models is both interesting and somewhat worrying: Arctic Amplification has only emerged as a realtime signal in recent years and, as the graph below indicates, modelling has not handled its effects particularly well with Arctic sea-ice degradation being a classic example.

Arctic Sea-ice minimum 2012

above: observed Arctic sea-ice extent (thick maroon line), with the other lines being modelled forecasts and the thicker black line being their mean. When someone tells you that the models don't get it right, it's worth pointing out that this works both ways!


At the other end of the world, investigations into this 400ppm carbon dioxide world of the past have yielded other indications of the type of world we are heading into. Sediment cores obtained during the ANDRILL drilling programme yielded results with which the 'Lake E' data are in good agreement. Writing in Nature in 2009, concerning an early (5-3 Ma) Pliocene Antarctic sediment core section, Naish et al note:

    Our data provide direct evidence for orbitally induced oscillations in the WAIS [West Antarctic Ice-Sheet], which periodically collapsed, resulting in a switch from grounded ice, or ice shelves, to open waters in the Ross embayment when planetary temperatures were up to approx 3 °C warmer than today and atmospheric CO2 concentration was as high as approx 400 p.p.m.v.

A second 2009 paper in Nature compared simulations of past Antarctic ice-cap behavour with the sedimentary history obtained from drillcore and determined that the West Antarctic Ice-Sheet had undergone major and perhaps total retreat during Marine Isotope Stage 31 and in other super-interglacials. The fact that there exists strong evidence for past major warming and its consequences in both polar regions suggests an interconnectivity between the poles, with the implication that these are effects occurring on a global scale.

2013 almost certainly marks the first year, since the Pliocene, in which rising carbon dioxide concentrations have breached the 400ppm milestone. What next? As Julie Brigham-Grette notes:

    "This could tell us where we are going in the near future. In other words, the Earth system response to small changes in carbon dioxide is bigger than suggested by earlier climate models."

To conclude, the Arctic climate response to warm forcing agents is to warm more than models would predict, with other poorly-constrained amplifying feedbacks the likely culprits, and what goes on in the Arctic tends to be reflected in due course by what goes on in the Antarctic. Past warming events during the Pleistocene and Pliocene have seen ice-cap collapse in both areas. Readers will be familiar with the figures: it is estimated that the collapse of the West Antarctica and Greenland ice-sheets would lead to getting on for fourteen metres of sea-level rise over a number of centuries. The results of the studies discussed above show that such events are compatible with a world in which the atmosphere contains ~400ppm of carbon dioxide. How, then, will Marine Isotope Stage 1 (the current interglacial) pan out? It's up to us to decide that one.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pliocene-snapshot.html

[Onslow]

It is worth noting that SO2 are part of fossil fuel emissions.  Europe and the US have reduced these emissions with the intent of reducing acid rain.  SO2 emissions from India and China have spiked in the last 30 years.

http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/11/1101/2011/acp-11-1101-2011.pdf

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/haso2-anthro-sulfur-dioxide-emissions-1850-2005-v2-86/maps/1

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/emission/index.php?idp=42

Effects of SO2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfur_aerosols

The loss of Arctic albedo is something worth a glance.

[Native Fisher]

http://www.whsv.com/home/headlines/Warmest-August-on-Record-275229651.html

Not in my part of the East Coast.  This was one of the coolest Augusts in H'burg in the 15 years I have lived here.

[Woolly Bugger]

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/17/weather-channel-founder-explains-the-history-of-the-global-warming-hoax/

[Onslow]

http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators/