A Global Temperature Chart Not in Gore’s Movie

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

So, you think today's temperatures are out of the ordinary?

Nobel Laureate Al Gore does, and strongly made the case in his schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" with all kinds of neat slides and graphs.

Of course, despite incessant claims of a consensus concerning this premise, not everyone agrees.

In fact, climatologist Cliff Harris and meteorologist Randy Mann, who, amongst other things, run a website called Long Range Weather, have created an absolutely marvelous long-term global temperature chart that wasn't in Gore's movie, and every climate alarmist in the media desperately hopes you never see it:

Unfortunately, to configure the picture in the space available, the text inside is a tad illegible. Those interested in viewing a larger more readable image should go here.

That said, it's great stuff, wouldn't you agree? And, so is this article by Harris and Mann entitled "Could This Cycle ‘Global Warming' Finally Be Winding Down?" (emphasis added throughout):

For many years, following widespread ICE AGE predictions back in the 1970s, we've heard that our planet is warming up "at an alarming rate". A study from the National Academy of Science claims that "global warming is real and has been strengthening since 1981." These scientists say that the leading cause of this latest warming is the increasing emissions of greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide. They also state that by the year 2100, temperatures may increase by 2.5 degrees to as much as 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit above those of today.

Up until late 2002, much of the Northern Hemisphere north of Latitude 40 was actually becoming GREENER with less total ice. In fact, the average growing season had been extended by around 2 weeks based on satellite data at the time.

BUT, now, we believe that temperatures are beginning to cool again, particularly in north- central Canada where this summer there was only about 2 weeks between damaging freezes from late June into mid-July. One of our Harris-Mann Climatology clients went fishing between July 10-13 in northwestern Saskatchewan and reported "piles of ice" still on the ground in the region and temperatures close to the freezing mark.

Although the recent summers of the early 21st Century have been amongst the hottest and driest on record across most of the U.S., the winter seasons, by extreme contrast, have been some of the coldest in recorded history. For example, Siberia in Russia reported readings of -70 degrees in January of 2001.

Even if our planet is warming up as many scientists claim, we're still much cooler today than we were four to eight-thousand years ago. In fact, there were probably no mid-latitude glaciers about 800 million years ago, because the Earth's climate was so mild at the time.

Temperatures today are primarily measured over concrete surfaces compared to grassy ones years ago. We all know that concrete and asphalt absorb heat and this often results in higher afternoon temperatures, especially when we have conditions of very little wind. During a typical hot, summer day, high temperatures may be as much as 3-7 degrees warmer at the official airport or downtown locations compared to outlying rural areas.

Mann and Harris went on to discuss the heat island effect in a fashion that very much confirms the work of Anthony Watts previously reported by NewsBusters.

With that in mind, the reader is strongly encouraged to read the entire piece.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Much like good news from the warfront

The MSM won't touch this.

Happy Trails...

Of course they won't.

Of course they won't. They've already decided that this whole "on the other hand" thing is irresponsible with regard to AGW. They put it in the same category as quoting a neo-Nazi for an opposing view whenever they talk about affirmative action.

Exactly and therein lies a

Exactly and therein lies a huge problem with the MSM. They claim to be objective, but report the "consensus" so much that reporting something like this will make them look like boobs...

.....oh wait a minute.

This whole GW issue is

This whole GW issue is about our government and others extracting more taxes to "pay for cooling the planet."  The whole idea is absurd. 

Yet, the above chart and the many studies that show much the same thing will not be revealed until after taxes are extracted. By that time, it will not matter that it is obvious that the "consensus of scientists" were wrong. 

And, the so-called MSM, will report it in as timely manner as they have the Armitage/Plame connection in an article above.

 

 

EvilCon555 Great info

EvilCon555

Great info gang. Very much what the MSM will avoid....

Just heard the Kraft family is buying green energy credits to power FoxBoro Stadium where the NE Patriots play (and apparently win alot). They are doing so to increase their "buying power". I translate that into one of two things - they are looking for better prices (the ultra rich didn't get that way over spending) or what the MSM will think - that they have a conscience and want to support the Goracle. It is an interesting but potentially dangerous precedent in my view. Buying pseudo-credits is much like paying a tax. What do you all think?

 

indulgences worked (for a while)

The Catholic Church sold indulgences for a time. It worked - for the church at least. The same sort of scam is going on with this baloney. Sooner or later someone who yells "Foul!" will be heard like Martin Luther. At that point the game is over.

-

What a marvelous, revealing chart.  Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Noel. 

}}---> Volcanic Eruptions

Noel, I think what you're failing to point out here is that this also is Man-made Global Warming.

Obviously those periods of increased eruptions are due to Mankind angering Mother Gaia.

I suggest we all bow down and kiss dirt.

It will only get worse for

It will only get worse for the AGW'ers when Mann and Harris adjust their curves to the real NOAA data recently released...

Okay, I'm sorry but there

Okay, I'm sorry but there is a very good reason not to trust this chart. It has no scale. There are a grand total of four actual temperatures on the graph. It wouldn't be hard to put a scale in, you just need a line of numbers down the left or right side that indicate to the reader what temperature the peaks in the curves actually mean. What is the difference between "warm" and "very warm," for instance?

Maybe the chart is accurate, but I would suggest that there is one good reason not to put a scale on your graph, and that is if your graph is not actually drawn to scale. If you have exaggerated any of the curves, then you can't take each point on the graph and have it represent a temperature. Otherwise you should be able to do that easily. 

The only other valid reason I could imagine for leaving that information out is if the authors have a methodological problem with estimates of historical temperature.  In that case such an issue should be stated very very clearly, and they should describe how they decided how big to make those curves without using historical estimates of temperature!

Again, I don't know that the chart is wrong, but I would never allow myself to use something so vague and unscientific to prove a point!

}}---> Trusting the chart

You're right Cleverpig.  Besides that there Inconvenient Truth movie is so much easier to follow.  And all them Polar bears drowning sure makes you wanna cry, don't it?

Look Again At The Chart

In particular, the authors posted a temperature in Jamestown, VA in 1607 of 54.3 deg F. The centerline temperature is 57 deg F and also labeled "Normal". Finally, 1998 is labeled with the temperature 58.3 deg F. In other word, the scale is there.

While it is true that the farther back one goes, the temperature data is based on proxy, my understanding is that such data is considered quite valid, scientifically-speaking. Thus, your criticisms should be considered moot.   

Just my $0.02

I don't think there's a

I don't think there's a problem with historical temperature estimates, I was just stretching for a valid reason why threre is no scale. As I acknowledged, there are four temperatures on that graph. I shouldn't have to take a ruler to my computer screen to try and figure out the value for the highest point on the curve. Also, why is there a point labelled "only a few scattered eruptions?" What does that mean?? How did they pick that point? Also, what I assume is the graph's legend blames half of the temperature variations on SOLAR RADIATION, but there's no solar radiation anywhere on the graph.

Maybe this graph is 100% right, but I would be mad at freshman biology students who turned something like this in for a lab report! Maybe there's a good reason, maybe the authors threw this together after a dinner party and put it on the web the next morning...

I'm getting a little harsh here, but I honestly think if someone brought you guys a chart like this in support of global warming, you would jump all over it and beat it to death with a slew of valid criticisms!

I see at least two things

I see at least two things in this chart that are totally ignored in warmer mythology. Which puts it ahead of Gore's and Mann's chart.

The climate crises of 535 and 1816.

Decreased solar irradiation and increased volcanic activity equals decreased in tempertures. Warmers ignore the sun and volcanos.

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

Noel. Did you forget that

Noel. Did you forget that the public is only to see charts from about 1970? In the history of this 4 1/2 billion old environoment, only the last 37 years matter. (;~>