And what about November-December 2009, when pipes were freezing and bursting all over the Northern Hem.? And how’d that fellow manage to come out with such exact figures for January 2010 only 25 days after the end of the month, when typically it takes a good climatologist maybe a half-year to work through all the different data sets? And how’d he get the data, when the critics of CO2 theory are constantly trying to get access to them, and are chronically refused by the CO2 mainstreamers?


CLIMATE scientists yesterday stunned Britons suffering the coldest winter for 30 years by claiming last month was the ?hottest January the world has ever seen.

The remarkable claim, based on global satellite data, follows Arctic temperatures that brought snow, ice and travel chaos to millions in the UK.

At the height of the big freeze, the entire country was blanketed in snow. But Australian weather expert Professor Neville Nicholls, of Monash University in Melbourne, said yesterday: “January, according to satellite data, was the hottest January we’ve ever seen.

“Last November was the hottest November we’ve ever seen. November-January as a whole is the hottest November-January the world has seen.” Veteran ?climatologist Professor Nicholls was speaking at an online climate change briefing, added: “It’s not warming the same everywhere but it is really quite challenging to find places that haven’t warmed in the past 50 years.”

His extraordinary claims came after the World Meteorological Organisation revealed 2000 to 2009 was the hottest decade since records began in 1850. … *snip*

Well obviously we all should be out there planting banana trees in the snow drifts… Read the comments on the above website for a good laugh.

What they don’t tell you is that the 2008-2009 figures actually dip cooler than 2000-2007, which was leveled off — see the graphic attached. The temperature curve stopped rising around 2000 and has leveled off or gone down a bit for the last 8-10 years. So on average, yes, an ever-so-slightly "hotter" decade, but not the "hottest ever", and in any case this is no confirmation for the predictions of CO2 theory, which demands a rather constant rise in temperatures. The Little Ice Age only ended around 1850… so we have been constantly warming since the bottom cold temp of the LIA, starting around 1700. Pointing to that warming trend since 1700, and blaming it upon industrial human activity, is sophistry. They also continue to deny the existence of the Medieval Warm Period some hundreds of years earlier, which was warmer than today, when Vikings were very nearly planting banana trees in what is today glaciers — OK that is a bit of an exaggeration, but the Brits and Francs did plant vineyards much farther north back then than is even possible today. Denying all that evidence is simply fraud and lying.

The new reports are hysterical academic gong-ringing, at its worst.

Someone’s big grant money must be coming due for a decision.

Meanwhile….. some calmer voices…..

ANALYSIS-Scientists examine causes for lull in warming

25 Feb 2010 14:59:01 GMT

Source: Reuters

* Exact causes unknown for lack of warming from 1999-2008

* The underlying reason for cold winter not known

* Climate science in focus after email scandal, errors

By Gerard Wynn and Alister Doyle

LONDON/OSLO, Feb 25 (Reuters) – Climate scientists must do more to work out how exceptionally cold winters or a dip in world temperatures fit their theories of global warming, if they are to persuade an increasingly sceptical public.

At stake is public belief that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet, and political momentum to act as governments struggle to agree a climate treaty which could direct trillions of dollars into renewable energy, away from fossil fuels.

Public conviction of global warming’s risks may have been undermined by an error in a U.N. panel report exaggerating the pace of melt of Himalayan glaciers and by the disclosure of hacked emails revealing scientists sniping at sceptics, who leapt on these as evidence of data fixing.

… *snip*

Got that? governments struggle to agree a climate treaty which could direct trillions of dollars into renewable energy, away from fossil fuels — thank you very much, but renewable energy was going along just fine before this CO2 theory began to be pushed by the environmental Marxists. In the end, this will work to discredit renewables, even as Obama now unmasks himself as a supporter of nuclear power plants! And the idea that "Trillions" will be directed into renewable energy is journalistic hyperbole. If you believe that, then I suggest to put down the hash pipe and join the real world. Their goal is not "renewable energy" nor "saving the planet", but rather to bloat the government even more, and crush everyone down into socialist authoritarianism. But in that, I suppose all the angry fist-shakers and one-world lemmings will be in the parade.

Go to the originals for the full articles.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: