Activists attack satellite temperature record in brazen new video

chartApparently NASA has something no other agency can boast: expensive orbiting piles of junk beaming back temperature readings that are completely worthless. That’s according to a new disinformation campaign being reported today by Breitbart News. Since 1978, satellites have been orbiting the Earth and measuring the planet’s temperature from five miles up. But there’s a problem: the last 18-plus years of that historical record show no statistical warming. So much so that even the IPCC acknowledged the pause in its last assessment report.

For over two decades, we’ve been told the world is heating up, it’s our fault, and the culprit is excessive carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Anyone who strays from that narrative is called ‘anti-science.’ This global warming “pause” has been such a sticking point, there are now close to 70 excuses to explain it away. Even President Obama has made global warming an enormous part of his second term; you only have to listen to his final State of the Union address to check the veracity of his commitment.

Now an environmental organization has cobbled together a new video telling its viewers to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, even as Toto pulls it back, revealing the truth. The video’s creators have even assembled all the usual climate ‘experts’ to state unequivocally the satellite temperature record is ‘distorted.’ Have you ever noticed that in a field as large (and growing) as climate science, the mainstream media (MSM) always goes to the same well for juicy end-of-times the-rapture-is-coming quotes?

This video is no different as it includes the usual array of alarmists: “Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth and Ben Santer.” If there names sound familiar, it’s because they were all put on full display in the 2009 ClimateGate emails. You may remember Michael Mann as the climate scientist who said in legal court documents (page 2, paragraph 2) that he had been “awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.” He wasn’t.

In the video, Mann, speaking with all the gravitas as one of Hillary’s pantsuits, says: “What’s ironic is that it’s really those satellite datasets that critics like John Christy hold up and Ted Cruz was emphasizing in that senate hearing a week ago…it is those datasets that are subject to the most adjustments that have historically been found to have been biased actually in the direction of showing too little warming.” Christy has testified before congress and stated that global warming has slowed, and is not rising at the cataclysmic rate as predicted by climate models.

Read rest…

Comments (5)

  • Avatar



    So NASA prefers the terribly placed and corrupted and “adjusted” surface record to Satellites? 😮

    They forgot that the Weather Balloon records support and confirm both of the Independent Satellite records?

    These are literally millions of data points. All showing that the Models are wrong.

    Scores of models, millions of data-points, more CO2 emitted than ever before, and the models crash and burn. | Graph: John Christy. Data: KMNI.

    “Don’t underestimate the importance of the blue-green circles and squares that mark the “observations”. These are millions of radiosondes, and two independent satellite records. They agree. There is no wiggle room, no overlap.

    Any sane modeler can only ask: “But how can the climate modelers pretend their models are working?” Afterall, predicting the known past with a model is not-too-hard; the modeler tweaks the assumptions, fiddles with the fudge factors, and adjusts until the lines mostly fit. Yet the best models of 2013 are not even adjusted to fit the best data, during the peak phase of emissions and the warmest period.

    Presumably the modelers must be convinced that this is noise, a temporary deviation, and that the warming will come. Is there any other word for this than denial? (Prof Matthew England on The Science Show says: “Change is actually completely in line with projections and consistent with projections that go out to three, four, five degrees Celsius warming by the end of the century. The last three decades have been closer to 0.2 degrees Celsius warming, so I contest that 0.1 anyway.“) He still won’t admit the models of 1990 categorically failed, let alone the modern “super” versions.

    Roy Spencer lays it out:

    In my opinion, the day of reckoning has arrived. The modellers and the IPCC have willingly ignored the evidence for low climate sensitivity for many years, despite the fact that some of us have shown that simply confusing cause and effect when examining cloud and temperature variations can totally mislead you on cloud feedbacks (e.g. Spencer & Braswell, 2010). The discrepancy between models and observations is not a new issue…just one that is becoming more glaring over time.”

  • Avatar



    The satellite data will become immediately acceptable and indisputably reliable as soon as the lying politicians at NASA etc. are allowed to start ” adjusting ” ( corrupting ) it.

  • Avatar



    [quote name=”JayPee”]The satellite data will become immediately acceptable and indisputably reliable as soon as the lying politicians at NASA etc. are allowed to start ” adjusting ” ( corrupting ) it.[/quote]

    What do you think happened to the Jason series, and the Euro sat for sea level! I think it was jason 2 that didn’t live up to the hype, along with the new Euro sat. So Jason 2 got adjusted to meet the needs and then shortly after Euro Sat went silent!

  • Avatar



    The New Scientific Method …Model the outcome you want and then change the actual readings ,either land or satellite temperature readings to match your model . Change as politicians require to keep the money flowing .

    Simple ,efficient and you are guaranteed to be right unlike the Old scientific method of actually trying to disprove your hypothesis .

    I feel sorry for anyone serious about science but at least we are on the downslope of this massive fraud .

Comments are closed