(NOAA): “There has been no U.S. warming since 2005.”

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Michael Mann’s Tree-Ring Circus

By Daniel John Sobieski, AMERICAN THINKER

This has been a tough week for climate hustler Michael Mann, who lost his defamation and libel lawsuit against respected climatologist and warming skeptic Dr. Tim Ball at the same time it was announced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that there has been no U.S. warming since 2005.

Mann, who poses as a climatologist at Penn State, has had his court case against genuine climate scientist Dr. Tim Ball dismissed, with Mann ordered to pay court costs, for failure to produce supporting evidence to prove his claim that global temperatures took a sharp upward turn when the Industrial Revolution and fossil-fuel use began pouring CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.

He didn’t because he can’t, and the fact is that the global warning he speaks of is Mann-made, a fantasy based on a career of perpetrating climate fraud, as indicated by NOAA’s report that there hasn’t been any U.S. warming for nearly a decade and a half and maybe even beyond that. As noted by James Taylor, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center for Climate and Environmental Policy at the Heartland Institute, in a piece for Real Clear Energy:

When American climate alarmists claim to have witnessed the effects of global warming, they must be referring to a time beyond 14 years ago. That is because there has been no warming in the United States since at least 2005, according to updated data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings…

There is also good reason to believe U.S. temperatures have not warmed at all since the 1930s. Raw temperature readings at the preexisting stations indicate temperatures are the same now as 80 years ago. All of the asserted U.S. warming since 1930 is the product of the controversial adjustments made to the raw data.

The use of properly positioned temperature recording stations coupled with satellite date, a relatively recent innovation that covers the whole earth, has given us a more realistic picture than computer models that can’t even  predict the past and fraudulently manipulate raw data from dubious sources.

Meteorologist Anthony Watts documented the inaccuracy of old weather station data used by NASA on hisSurfaceStations.org website. Watts said that “90 percent of them don’t meet (the government’s) old, simple rule called the ‘100-foot rule” for keeping thermometers 100 feet or more from biasing influence.” Many of the U.S. stations were in locations such as paved driveways, near rooftop exhaust vents, even near idling jet engines.

In 2016, Mann testified before the Democratic Platform Drafting Committeethat actual data didn’t really matter because we could actually see climate change happening. The Washington Times noted both his appearance and at least one contradiction to his claims based, not on computer models, but on actual empirical observation:

Leading climate doomsayer Michael Mann recently downplayed the importance of climate change science, telling Democrats that data and models “increasingly are unnecessary” because the impact is obvious…

Mr. Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University, spoke before the committee June 17 in Phoenix… Mr. Mann told the panel that “the signal of climate change is no longer subtle, it is obvious,” citing hurricanes, flooding in Texas and South Carolina, the California drought and “record heat” in Arizona.

Skeptics have hotly challenged the link between rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and “extreme weather” events, noting, for example, that hurricane activity is on the decline.

A nine-year “hurricane drought” of Category 3 storms starting in 2006 beat the previous mark of eight years from 1861-1868, the longest such streak since such recording began in 1851, according to a May 2015 study by the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Mann has proven adept over his career at making controversial, no, fraudulent adjustments made to the raw data. Mann might be remembered as one of the participants in what Investor’s Business Daily dubbed a “tree-ring circus” — the Climategate scandal. As IBD noted at the time:

Mann was at the heart of the Climate-gate scandal in 2009, when emails were unearthed from Britain’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. In one email sent to Mann and others, CRU director Philip Jones speaks of the “trick” of filling in gaps of data in order to hide evidence of temperature decline:

“I’ve just completed Mike’s nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline (in global temperatures),” the email read.

It was that attempt to “hide the decline” through the manipulation of data that helped bring down the global warming house of cards.

The graph created by professor Mann and his colleagues carefully selected and manipulated tree-ring data to supposedly prove that air temperatures had been stable for 900 years, then soared off the charts — in a pattern resembling a hockey stick — in the 20th century due to man-made greenhouse gases. Mann et al. performed the neat trick of making the Medieval Warm Period (about A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850) statistically disappear.

As Investor’s Business Daily also noted:

The graph relied on data from trees on the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia. Here, too, the results were carefully selected. Just 12 trees from the 252 cores in the CRU’s Yamal data set were used. A larger data set of 34 tree cores from the vicinity showed no dramatic recent warming, and warmer temperatures in the middle ages. They were not included.

“Hiding the decline” and any actual evidence that global warming hype was nothing more an attempt by climate change scammers to impose what has become a religion. MIT Professor Richard Lindzen is quoted in the Daily Callerquestioning the tenets of this new religion:

Throughout history, governments have twisted science to suit a political agenda. Global warming is no different, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly. It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions,” writes Lindzen in the fall 2013 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons…

Lindzen compares global warming to past politicized scientific movements: the eugenics movement in the early 20th Century and Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union under Stalin. However, the MIT professor argues that global warming goes even beyond what these past movements in terms of twisting science.

“Global Warming has become a religion,” writes Lindzen. “A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.”

The goal is to use climate change as a means to increase government power over every aspect of our lives, what we make, how we make it, what energy we use, what cars we drive, even what food we eat. And now the high priests of the global warming religion are demanding what other false religions have demanded — human sacrifices upon their altar. As Michael Mann has found out, facts are stubborn things and tree rings don’t always ring true.

Daniel John Sobieski is a former editorial writer for Investor’s Business Dailyand freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Human EventsReasonMagazine, and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.              

August 29, 2019 | 26 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

26 Comments / 26 Comments

  1. @ Ted Belman:I have been studying the actual NOAA site and you may obtain both global and Regional, USA climate information.

    I decided instead of reading an article which may have a viewpoint it is selling to look at the data. The temperature appears to be rising in the time span they have collected temperature data. This time frame is minuscule compared to the existence of the earth, so the question is it significantly significant and does it prove that man is the cause of climate change? Is it a combo factor natural forces and man?

    Anyone who is interested I suggest going to the NOAA site and reading the data for yourself.


    Also if the temperature did not rise in a particular location in a decade or so that would not negate climate change or temperature rise overall. The temperature on earth during this period has been rising. Again what does this prove is the question.

  2. I wold love to believe this, but I can find no such report anywhere on the NOAA site. In fact, the July climate report is this:

    The July 2019 global land and ocean surface temperature departure from average was the highest for July since global records began in 1880 at 0.95°C (1.71°F) above the 20th century average. This value surpassed the previous record set in 2016 by 0.03°C (0.05°F). Nine of the 10 warmest Julys have occurred since 2005, with the last five years (2015–2019) ranking among the five warmest Julys on record. July 1998 is the only July from the 20th century to be among the 10 warmest Julys on record. July 2019 marked the 43rd consecutive July and the 415th consecutive month with temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th century average. Julys 2016, 2017, and 2019 are the only Julys that had a temperature departure from average at or above 0.90°C (1.62°F). Climatologically, July is the globe’s warmest month of the year. With July 2019 the warmest July on record, at least nominally, this resulted in the warmest month on record for the globe.


  3. @ Edgar G.:Israeli polls are very lousy historically.

    17% of the electorate has not decided who to vote for.

    The right is historically under representative in polls.

    We have no idea what the turnout will be.

    So we have no idea who will win.

  4. @ Felix Quigley:
    Yes, of course, as I was writing on the lack of medieval global scientific data. I visualised that period rather too vividly.I also had in mind the ice core samples detailing rather accurately the situation from past eons., about which I’ve actually read much. So I really should not have written as I did.

    ******To be accurate, I am far more interested in the teetering outcome of the coming election. It seems that no matter what ploy Netanyahu tries, the presently predicted outcome does not change. It really worries me.

  5. I have just been thinking…I do not need this sort of stuff in my life at this moment. I support this young woman who has just hitched a ride across the Atlantic. One way or another the youth are going to be the future. They have to look forward to 60 years give or take of global warming. The scientists say the situation is really grim. Why would I be involved with old has beens who cannot get their act together. I have no wish to be involved with this site for one second longer and I am dammed if I will. I will not even read it. I will leave it to your mopings. I have stayed so long because I have a soft spot for the Jewish people. I will definitely not be changing my mind on this. The split is over the defence of lies on global warming. This young woman in her arrival in America has summed it all up perfectly when she says simply Trump disregards the science of global warming. I am afraid that the more people like Adam answers these lies that people will not see things in a reasoned manner but will become harder and more bitter. That is reality. This hatred of science as shown on Breitbart and Infowars, backing Trump, is not exactly fascism, yet, but it sure has the seeds of it. You can find a direct link between these haters of science, and these denigrators of science, in the Nazi period as a whole, with the Nazi ideology being mixed in with black magic and such horrible ignorance. We are not at that stage anywhere yet that I know of, but there are signs

  6. @ Ted Belman:
    By the way I attack nobody personally. That is just a tactic seeking victimhood. I am called in the most nasty tone possible a “commie” which is the term used in the Joe McCarthy era by Yamit, and I do not complain. Just get on with the issues at hand.

    What I am questioning and Adam too is whether this article by NOAA, that is the NOAA I know, and Adam claims there are now many NOAAs, whether this article was ever written. The url you give is by somebody writing about this not to be found NOAA report. Adam thinks it is a disinformation strategy and it looks like that to me also. Against this idea that there has been no change in temperature over 15 years is the following:


    “The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) officially declared 2014 the hottest year in 134 years of record keeping.

    NOAA reported that this was the hottest December on record and that 2014 as a whole was 1.24°F (0.69°C) above the 20th century average: “This was the highest among all years in the 1880–2014 record, surpassing the previous records of 2005 and 2010 by 0.07°F (0.04°C).”

    As the NOAA data makes clear, human-caused global warming has seen no “hiatus.” In fact, as the top figure shows, the decade of the 2010s is on track to be the hottest decade on record. The 1980s were the hottest decade on record at the time. Then they were beat by 1990s, which in turn were beat by the 2000s for the title of hottest decade. Each decade this century is likely to be the hottest on record?—?unless we slash carbon pollution ASAP.

    “This is the latest in a series of warm years, in a series of warm decades,” said Dr. Gavin Schmidt director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, which tracks global temps. “While the ranking of individual years can be affected by chaotic weather patterns, the long-term trends are attributable to drivers of climate change that right now are dominated by human emissions of greenhouse gases.”

    “The globe is warmer now than it has been in the last 100 years and more likely in at least 5,000 years,” said Rutgers University climate scientist Jennifer Francis. “Any wisps of doubt that human activities are at fault are now gone with the wind.”

    NASA posted this background video on “2014: Warmest Year On Record”:

    There then follows a video by NASA.

    So this report by NOAA claiming no change is seemingly false. Fake information.

    And it is the most serious issue possible.

  7. @ Edgar G.:
    No problems Edgar. Your question is at the centre.

    “In paleoclimatology, or the study of past climates, scientists use what is known as proxy data to reconstruct past climate conditions. These proxy data are preserved physical characteristics of the environment that can stand in for direct measurements. Paleoclimatologists gather proxy data from natural recorders of climate variability such as tree rings, ice cores, fossil pollen, ocean sediments, corals and historical data. By analyzing records taken from these and other proxy sources, scientists can extend our understanding of climate far beyond the instrumental record. ”

    There is a wealth of other ideas in this article (by the real not fraudulent NOAA)

    On Proxy data there is also an article in Wikipedia.

  8. Adam I was trying to locate this report as well and unable to. If this is all a forgery type article it is very clever. I had noticed that there was no direct quote from the NOAA report, nothing in inverted commas to pin it down, and never an url. But what makes me terribly suspicious is that it is not like any of these climate scientists to remark on a very short period of time, which 15 years is in this context. For example Michael Mann developed the hockey stick graph by looking at 2000 years, meaning the past 2000 years, and this has been extended to 10,300 years in the very recent reports fully published (but not easy reading) to which Tim Radford refers to in the article I gave the url of. If they have extended this fraud to this extent then I think I am finished with Trump and all of them, and will draw a line under it. Thanks Adam for this sterling work.

  9. I have carefully seached NOAA’s websites (there are many of them) and found no evidence whatsoever that such a report exists or ever existed. More climate fake news.

  10. @ Felix Quigley:

    Felix- a question…How could we know that the Medieval warm period and the 17th Cent “Little Ice Age”” were not global. There were no phones, nor any way of communicating except on foot, taking years, or by horses carefully prepared in relays beforehand. And for certain this was not done. There was no accepted science to collate any records. All we know about them are anecdotal accounts, and the evidence of tree rings and other natural phenomena, made in modern times,.

    So Felix..what I mean is that it COULD have been global and we’d never know unless we did the research in those elusive far away lands in modern times. If we have done, you haven’t mentioned it nor given sources.

    Admittedly, I have no real knowledge of this subject, but contradictory and seemingly dubious assertions jump out at me, so please forgive my ignorance if you have answered my points elsewhere…

  11. Felix Quigley Said:

    Ted Belman is poking in the pig manure and is helping us real people to see the utter criminal nastiness of Trump and co.

    Felix, you are forever attacking me personally.

    Plus you never miss an opportunity to smear Trump. It is disgusting that you refer to the “utter criminal nastiness” of Trump. Don’t smear him. If you think he exhibits “utter crimninal nastiness”, prove it.

  12. @ Felix Quigley:
    Here is the proof:
    Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.

    Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?

    “Okay, here’s the bombshell. The recent volcanic eruption in Iceland since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet – all of you.

    Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress – it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.

    I know….it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids “The Green Revolution” science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $5 light bulbs ….. well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.

    The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in just four days – yes, FOUR DAYS – by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time – EVERY DAY.

    I don’t really want to rain on your parade too much, but when the volcano Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

    Of course, I shouldn’t spoil this ‘touchy-feely tree-hugging’ moment and mention the effect of solar and

  13. Felix Quigley Said:

    “The graph created by professor Mann and his colleagues carefully selected and manipulated tree-ring data to supposedly prove that air temperatures had been stable for 900 years, then soared off the charts — in a pattern resembling a hockey stick — in the 20th century due to man-made greenhouse gases. Mann et al. performed the neat trick of making the Medieval Warm Period (about A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850) statistically disappear.

    UPDATE – Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann “hides the decline” AGAIN

    Quack… Mann loses another one more to come…. many more to come in fact. 😛

  14. @ RiverFred:
    So many lies in your piece. So just justify one claim

    “One major volcanic eruption will wipe out any gains.”

    Give some source, thereby scientific backing, for this dramatic statement…IF YOU ARE ABLE

  15. @ Felix Quigley:
    What I wish repliers to focus on are these points by Radford:

    1. the planet is warming faster than at any time in the last 2000 years

    2. this warming does not have a historic precedent

    3. or a natural cause

  16. European and US scientists have cleared up a point that has been nagging away at climate science for decades: not only is the planet warming faster than at any time in the last 2,000 years, but this unique climate change really does have neither a historic precedent nor a natural cause.

    Other historic changes – the so-called Medieval Warm Period and then the “Little Ice Age” that marked the 17th to the 19th centuries – were not global. The only period in which the world’s climate has changed, everywhere and at the same time, is right now.


    I would strongly advise you twisters of truth not to disregard this article

  17. @ Felix Quigley:
    What is your point, Trump does not believe in global warming as proven above. Also, CO2 does not track with global warming: Per Jackson Pemberton ·
    Brigham Young University
    I graduated with honors in Physics and Math and did a lot of research on anthropomorphic warming and found one crucial fact that seems to go completely unnoticed. The ice core data, which covers the last four ice ages, shows that CO2 concentrations continue to rise right into the first few thousand years of each plunge into a new ice age. The data is quite dramatic : temperatures fall sharply as each age begins and meanwhile CO2 continues to rise for 2,000 to 7,000 years. This shows that CO2 concentration does not drive warming otherwise it would track with temperature.

  18. This is wonderful. Ted Belman is poking in the pig manure and is helping us real people to see the utter criminal nastiness of Trump and co.

    “The graph created by professor Mann and his colleagues carefully selected and manipulated tree-ring data to supposedly prove that air temperatures had been stable for 900 years, then soared off the charts — in a pattern resembling a hockey stick — in the 20th century due to man-made greenhouse gases. Mann et al. performed the neat trick of making the Medieval Warm Period (about A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850) statistically disappear.

    As Investor’s Business Daily also noted:

    The graph relied on data from trees on the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia. Here, too, the results were carefully selected. Just 12 trees from the 252 cores in the CRU’s Yamal data set were used. A larger data set of 34 tree cores from the vicinity showed no dramatic recent warming, and warmer temperatures in the middle ages. They were not included.

    That would be “The Medieval Warm Period”

    Was not a world wide event at all. Got that. Most important. Not world wide.

    The present heating is world wide because capitalism is world wide.

    Of interest here is the following article


    If every country fulfills every promised Paris Climate Accord carbon cut for the next 14 years at a cost of trillions, carbon dioxide emissions will drop by 60 gigatons. To keep the rise of temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, the world must reduce such emissions by 6,000 gigatons. One major volcanic eruption will wipe out any gains. By the way increased carbons do not track with warming in fact they do the opposite.
    Climate change is some 97% natural, not manmade (contrary to that phony 97% consensus.) Real-world evidence does not support claims about dangerously rising seas, increasingly violent storms or worsening droughts. Some climate scientists say another major cooling is likely soon. High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.