How geological forces are behind the ‘Warmest Year Ever’

Recent media reports by the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) are claiming 2015 as the “Warmest Year Ever” based on land-based temperature readings.

Figure 1.)  Ocean temperature maps of the 1998 and 2015 El Nino’s. Anomalously warm areas of the Pacific Ocean are highlighted in red.Figure 1.) Ocean temperature maps of the 1998 and 2015 El Nino’s. Anomalously warm areas of the Pacific Ocean are highlighted in red.

Yet the most important aspect of these stories has been drowned out / lost in the giant media climate change Tsunami wave of propaganda and misinformation. No one has answered one extremely important question: What was the cause of this increase in atmospheric temperatures after an 18-plus-year lull?

Based on large amounts of reliable data, observations, and very telling shallow sea surface temperature (SST) maps, the answer to the above question is geological forces (as a geologist, I am acutely aware of the Earth’s physical structure and substance, its history, and the processes that act on it). In other words, like all scientists in their respective fields, I have prejudices too, but I try to keep them grounded and based on sound scientific principals, not pie-in-the-sky computer models.

Proof supporting my predisposed statement is based on: Utilizing the most reliable atmospheric temperature data, low-level satellite measurements, and that Earth’s atmospheric temperature has not risen in nearly 19 years. Even using NOAA’s ‘cooked’ temperature data, there has only been moderate and, more importantly, constant temperature rate increases for 18.9 years. None of the data sets supports / predicts a dramatic and sudden increase in global atmospheric temperatures as per the 2015 record-breaking year.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) during the last 18.9 years has risen at a constant, moderate rate of roughly 2 parts per million/year. This trend agrees with / confirms that the constant rate and very low-level temperature trends of the last 19 years, especially the original “unadjusted” data, is correct. So here again no hint that the trace gas CO2 is the cause of the 2015 atmospheric temperature change.

Having eliminated the top two 2015 temperature anomaly cause contenders, at least as per those favoring the theory of man-made global warming, it becomes necessary to consider other alternative reasons. Let’s begin:

The 1998 El Niño warmed Earth’s atmosphere by 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.34 degrees Fahrenheit) and not surprisingly the 2015 El Niño has warmed the Earth by a nearly identical amount…1.57 degrees Celsius (2.86 degrees Fahrenheit). The main takeaway from this observation is that the 2015 ‘warmest year ever’ record is not that unique. An equally anomalous increase in atmospheric temperatures occurred in 1998. Both of these anomalous atmospheric temperature events occurred in El Niño years. This strongly implies that there is a relationship between so-called ‘warmest year ever’ records and El Niños.

For more detailed discussions concerning the geological nature of all El Niños, the reader is directed to these previous CCD posts here and here. There you will find very compelling and scientific information / discussions that document how El Niños are generated by super-heated and chemically charged fluid flow from an area east of Papua New Guinea and the Solomon islands. This is one of the most active geological areas on earth (Figure 2.).

Figure 2.  These two maps illustrate the 1998 and 2015 El Nino’s as represented by hot ocean temperature maps. Hot El Nino areas are shaded reddish- brown. Both El Nino’s were heat sourced at the same exact / non-moving limited area location (“Point Source”). This and significant amounts of other information strongly indicate that these, and in fact all El Nino’s, were generated from geological heat flow from a fixed non-moving geological feature.Figure 2. These two maps illustrate the 1998 and 2015 El Nino’s as represented by hot ocean temperature maps. Hot El Nino areas are shaded reddish- brown. Both El Nino’s were heat sourced at the same exact / non-moving limited area location (“Point Source”). This and significant amounts of other information strongly indicate that these, and in fact all El Nino’s, were generated from geological heat flow from a fixed non-moving geological feature.

If you dig deep enough into many of the 2015 ‘warmest year ever’ media reports you will find statements that can be paraphrased as follows: ”El Niños may be the root cause of the current temperature anomaly”, and “El Niños are caused by unknown natural forces.” These are very telling statements that are missed by most reporters in the mainstream media, and by extension the public, and are essentially a confirmation that man-made global warming is not the root cause of this 2015 warming anomaly.

Some things in life are counter-intuitive, but when you stop and think about these things they make perfect sense. These are “aha moments”, defined in Webster’s as a moment of sudden realization, insight, recognition, or comprehension. So let’s take a moment and think about the 2015 increase in atmospheric temperatures. It just doesn’t fit any of the normal trends. It is in fact so bizarre that it has to be caused be some seemingly unknown force—a force that is outside the normal CO2, atmospheric temperature, or oceanic temperature trends.

It’s time to give proper consideration that both the 2015 El Niño and 2015 ‘warmest year ever’ might be caused by geological forces. Such as a sudden expulsion of chemically charged and super-heated seawater from a deep ocean fault zone in the western Pacific Ocean that is the proven source area for all E Niños (and happen on a regular basis). This notion certainly fits all the known data and observations. Additionally, its fits very well into the Plate Climatology Theory, which proposes that geological forces are the root cause of many “natural” variations in the Earth’s climate patterns, including El Niños.

Hopefully after reading this, you too will have your own “aha moment.”

James Edward Kamis is a working professional Geologist, AAPG member of 41 years who has a BS and MS in Geology.  He has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. Years of research / observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is also an important driver of the Earth’s climate.

REFERENCES

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/techrpts/tr9802/tr9802.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997%E2%80%9398_El_Ni%C3%B1o_event

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-2015-hottest-year-20160119-story.html

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/comparing-el-nino-to-1997-19278

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (9)

  • Avatar

    old44

    |

    Just love this comment by Karl.

    Non-scientists who reject mainstream climate science often criticize NOAA for adjustments to past temperature records to reconcile the measurement devices with modern techniques, (read: computer models)

  • Avatar

    Budlap

    |

    Just love the explanation – El Nino is the magma flows boys…. heatin’ up ’em big water! Wham! How didn’t ’em science geeks who spend their time in basements sniffing each others methan realize that ALL the heat comes from earth farts?
    My hat just flew!

    Occam’s razor boys… occam’s razor.

  • Avatar

    David Lewis

    |

    [quote name=”old44″]

    Non-scientists who reject mainstream climate science often criticize NOAA for adjustments to past temperature records to reconcile the measurement devices with modern techniques, (read: computer models)[/quote]

    It really bothers me when people supporting the disastrous man made climate change theory are called scientists, let a lone mainstream scientists. I’m bothered because they do not follow the standard scientific practice. As I have often stated in other posts, this process includes comparing data to a theory, and if they don’t match, change the theory. This has never been done with climate change. Instead they are trying to change the data to match the theory.

    Another standard practice they don’t follow is to use all the data available, or if there is a good reason not to use it, acknowledge the data and document why they didn’t use it. In the current alarmist “science” there is a lot of data that isn’t used and it is very obvious the only reason was the data didn’t support the political cause.

    A very clear cut and easy to understand example is NOAA’s paper on ocean acidification.

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/12/23/noaagate-how-ocean-acidification-could-turn-out-to-be-the-biggest-con-since-michael-manns-hockey-stick/

    Here they selected 1988, a year with near record low pH as their base line. This guaranteed that future years would be more acid. They ignored all data before then including 1920 when the oceans were more acid than they are now.

    Though our corrupt “politically correct” system may have put people in positions that should be occupied by scientists, it is hard to call them that when they are not acting like scientists. They are political activists.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Couldn’t agree more with David Lewis . NOAA is a political tool that must be under tremendous pressure to serve it’s current political masters . That’s OK , their past scary stories and claims are readily available on the net . They can’t hide .

    Don’t include 2/3 of the world’s surface temperatures but include those asphalt
    based thermometers . No bias there .

    What’s next… 2016 is the warmest year …..
    with a probability of well er a 10 Percent
    mumble mumble .

    The reason newspapers are not drilling down on this nonsense is they are just to busy laying off intelligent people from their failed business plans .

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    David Lewis
    You are absolutely correct
    These alarmists are not scientists even though by their credentials one might think they are. But they betray and abandon science as soon as they ignore and jettison the scientific method because it inconveniently does not bolster their politically advanced claims.

    If the statement of the hypothesis and

    It’s development to a theory

    Do not rigorously adhere to the

    Fundamentals of the

    Scientific Method

    IT IS NOT SCIENCE

    It might be political puff talk

    It might be religious wishful thinking

    It might be soothing barroom blathering

    But it is NOT SCIENCE !

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    It must be global warming causing a 44% increase in centenarians since 2000 and the baby boom of Orca whales on the west coast . Yippie for global warming !
    After all isn’t everything related to global warming or is it just the bad stuff ?

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    Of course , Amber

    Even the GROSS National Product must be related and even caused by Global Worming

    You can prove this through regression analysis and better yet through multi-linear analysis and spectral analysis

    Not that it means anything because it in no way points to causation

    But it makes a nice presentation regardless of

    IMMATERIALITY.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    JayPee Well I’m glad you can’t prove it through Russian tree ring analysis .

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    Amber
    I’m attacking the fundamentality of their presupposition which destroys their entire continued argumentation.

    There is no reason to go any further when the
    basis of their colloquy is erroneous
    At best and

    Fraudulent

    At worst.

Comments are closed

No Trackbacks.