What Is the Use of Global Temperature If It Really Doesn't Exist?

By T.L. Winslow (TLW), the Historyscoper™

© Copyright by T.L. Winslow. All Rights Reserved.

Original Pub. Date: Jan. 30, 2020. Last Update: Oct. 10, 2020.



A Lesson in TLW's New Real Climate Science Course



“THE TRICKY THING about climate change, and explaining what it is, is that it's very hard to see. It's hard to feel the rising temperatures when the difference is one- or two-tenths of a degree a year. But those tenths of degrees add up.” - Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Game of Thrones Star Sounds the Alarm on Climate Change, Nov. 6, 2017

Not global temperature, global yearly avg. surface temperature. You can’t stick a big thermometer up the Earth’s butt like a baby, sorry, and the Earth’s can’t have one single surface temperature because it is spinning under the Sun and heating and cooling at the same time, i.e., there is no way that Earth’s surface temperatures can instantly equalize. This artificial computer-generated quantity based on a ton of temperature measurement stations with questionable data was created solely for use by the environmental leftists and globalist Marxists centered in the U.N. and its IPCC global octopus of kept scientists, academics, journalists, and politicians to foist the hoax that CO2 is evil, and isn’t even a molecule with more oxygen than carbon, it’s “carbon pollution”, and the only way to save the world is to dismantle the fossil fuel industry and capitalism with it to pave the way for their real goal of global Marxism.

Researchers Question Validity Of A 'Global Temperature'

On Earth’s Meaningless Global Temperature

Does a Global Temperature Exist?

Cooling the Past: Made Easy for Paul Barry

“’The temperature of the Earth’ is an ambiguous term that cannot mean anything. At any given time, it is possible to measure the temperature of some very small part of the Earth, such as, perhaps, a shot glass of water. At that same moment, other temperatures of the Earth that could be measured will show a variation from the temperature of molten rock (1,300 to 2,200°F) to polar ice (32 to -76°F). DDaily variation of the same place on Earth can be 50 to 60°F. Seasonal variation can be well over 100°F in high latitudes. Conceptually, we could imagine, but not actually measure, every possible place and thing, at every possible time through all the seasons, and then average these data. To detect ‘global warming,’ we would have to modify these data to include the specific heat of everything measured, as well as the latent heat of all the things that change phase such as water, which appears as a liquid, vapor, and ice. Conceptually, yes; actually, no. Not possible.” - Jerry Powlas, There's No Such Thing as the Earth's Ideal Temperature

WHAT IS THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE? - The Corbett Report

What would be funny if it weren’t so tragic is that NASA only claims a total of 0.8C warming since 1880, an amount too small for animals and plants to even sense. Worse, most of that 0.8C comes from an increase in nighttime minimum temperatures. This is so small that it falls within the range of natural temperature variation, and is equivalent to zero. In 2020 they changed it to "a little more than 1C" (1.1C), big deal.

World of Change: Global Temperatures

US Average Temperature Trends in Context

List of Historical Temperature Extremes by U.S. State Shows No Sign of Global Warming

Study: No change in global temperatures for 100 years

As Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever put it:

"The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degrees Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period.'" - Nobel Physicist Calls Earth's Temperature "Amazingly Stable"

“In the case of global warming, a number of bodies are telling us they have all the evidence, but refuse to tell us what it is. The data have been processed, but how? Time series have been altered, but why? Some phenomena have been left out of the equation, but on what grounds? We do not know, and we are simply required to keep quiet and do what we are told. No second opinion is permitted... The very definition of a global temperature for the Earth poses some serious problems. Determining an average temperature for a system as complex as the Earth has no physical meaning. Unfortunately, this question, fundamental though it is, has never been tackled by organizations involved in meteorology. For them, the answer is simple: you take all the sensors and calculate the average! The competent organizations use an arithmetic mean, adding up all the temperature readings available and dividing the total by the number of sensors. But this poses some serious problems. Now let us imagine that one sensor covers 1 km2, while the other covers 5 km2. The sensors give readings of 10ºC and 12ºC. How are we going to calculate the average temperature? Nobody knows!” - http://www.scmsa.eu/archives/SCM_RC_2015_08_24_EN.pdf

Worse, the IPCC quotes numbers like “0.8C”, when the raw data has way less precision than that, smelling of rank fraud. Until the 1960s thermometers were only accurate to two degrees F, and even today make that 1.4F. To give a figure with decimal places is like saying that the average IQ in Timbuktu has increased by 0.2 per decade, when IQs are measured as integers only. Sure, if the IQs increased by 2 per century, in hindsight one might say that’s 0.2 per decade, although on a decade by decade basis that kind of precision is useless, because it’s no longer a measurement but a prediction, but the IPCC scientists announce fractions of a degree of global warming every year, making the figures into projections not actual historical measurements. without mentioning that because of the IPCC’s political agenda. Who do they think they’re zooming? Everybody knows that GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

The IPCC has long been hijacking NOAA and NASA to produce the political results they demand rather than what science would demand.

NASA's "Smoking Gun" of Climate Fraud

Extending the history of NASA global temperature fraud - Tony Heller

The Greatest Scientific Fraud of All Time - Part 27 (Tony Heller)

Why does an increase in temperature of 2 degrees Celsius pose such a threat to climate change experts? - Patrick Boschmann

“Sadly, in the field of climate research and climate policy, good data, when not ignored entirely, is increasingly twisted to fit the narrative claiming that humans are causing a climate crisis.”

“Climate action partisans, in pursuit of political power and ever-increasing resources, force data to fit their delusion that humans must forego modern, industrial civilization to save humanity and the earth from climate doom.”

“This problem is more than evident in a recent report from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on global temperature trends.”

“Between them, the two agencies operate the most accurate, comprehensive system of temperature measuring instruments in the world.”

“But rather than cite data from their best sources when NASA and NOAA reported global temperatures on January 15, they chose to use severely compromised data from temperature readings adjusted— in a process called ‘homogenization’—they and others gathered from biased monitoring stations.”

“NASA and NOAA announced that 2019 was the second warmest year since modern record-keeping began in 1880, helping to make the 2010s the ‘warmest decade on record.’”

“These claims are based on the utterly unreliable adjusted temperature measurements recorded by surface temperature stations scattered across the globe.”

“These measurements, at least the raw data from them, are usually sufficiently accurate to inform local inhabitants of the temperature and weather anomalies in their area on a particular day, but as measures of actual trends telling us something important about whether humans are causing global warming, most of them are virtually worthless.”

NOAA violated its own rules when it undertook a similar adjustment process for recording ocean temperatures, beginning in 2015.”

As David Rose wrote for the Daily Mail: “[NOAA scientists] took reliable readings from [ocean] buoys but then ‘adjusted’ them upwards—using readings from seawater intakes on ships … even though readings from the ships have long been known to be too hot.”

“When you mix bad data with good, you no more produce reliable results than you do by adding muddy river water to purified bottled water to produce safe drinking water.”

“NASA and NOAA’s new report is another instance of ‘garbage in, garbage out,’ in which their use of bad data produces flawed results, which, based on experience, will be used to push bad policies.”

“NASA and NOAA jointly or separately operate the U.S. Climate Reference Network, the gold standard of surface temperature data, global satellites, and weather balloons.”

"The temperature data recorded by these three independent, unbiased temperature-measuring networks show minimal warming over the past 40 years.”

Yet the agencies ignored these datasets in their recent report—proving their dogmatic belief in a human-caused climate catastrophe.”

“NASA and NOAA are like toddlers trying to fit square pegs into round holes, and just as likely as toddlers to throw fits when their efforts are stymied by reality.”

“The Trump administration should steeply cut NASA and NOAA’s climate budgets until agency heads and career staff get the message they will not be rewarded for repeatedly telling “sky is falling” climate scare stories, when the truth about temperature and climate trends is, in fact, far from alarming.”

H. Sterling Burnet: NASA and NOAA's Latest Climate Warming Is a Result of Purposefully Flawed Data

“The estimated average ±0.2 C station error has been incorrectly assessed as random, and the systematic error from uncontrolled variables has been invariably neglected. The systematic errors in measurements from three ideally sited and maintained temperature sensors are calculated herein. Combined with the ±0.2 C average station error, a representative lower-limit uncertainty of ±0.46 C was found for any global annual surface air temperature anomaly. This ±0.46 C reveals that the global surface air temperature anomaly trend from 1880 through 2000 is statistically indistinguishable from 0 C, and represents a lower limit of calibration uncertainty for climate models and for any prospective physically justifiable proxy reconstruction of paleo-temperature. The rate and magnitude of 20th century warming are thus unknowable, and suggestions of an unprecedented trend in 20th century global air temperature are unsustainable.” - Surface temperature uncertainty, quantified

“In a high-quality glass environmental thermometer manufactured in 1960, the accuracy would be +/- 1.4F. (2% of range). The resolution of an astute and dedicated observer would be around +/-1F. Therefore the total error margin of all observed weather station temperatures would be a minimum of +/-2.5F, or +/-1.30c.” - The Metrology of Thermometers

To foist their insidious plan for world govt. which demands that every nation surrender their lifestyle along with their sovereignty to them so that they can finally go full Marxist with a world police force that keeps everybody down, the hoaxers rush into Lalaland with extrapolations out to the year 2100, demanding trillions now with no money-back guarantee. At the same time they love to alarm the public with claims that each year is the “warmest ever” without mentioning that the yearly increases are in the hundredths of one degree, i.e., fake because they are less than the uncertainty in the measurements, How disgusting to try to stretch the truth for money and power.

DR TIM BALL MUST READ : Environmentalism – Evidence Suggests It Was Always And Only About Achieving World Government

Environmentalists Want To Take Your Food, Your Home, And Your Children

TL Winslow's answer to Climatology: Why is climate change politicized?

To go along with this the IPCC has a trillion-dollar climate agitprop machine generating fake science reports about the terrible damage already being done by the measly 1.1C-1.2C warming since 1880, throwing everything they do into question. Every day the local temperature swings by tens of degrees, and all life is well adapted to take it in stride. The only real climate change we have is called the four seasons. Ever since its creation, the U.N. IPCC has systematically manufactured a fake past for the Earth to make its "global average temperature" track the atmospheric CO2 concentration. This is not science. Real science seeks the truth and follow it where it leads. What the IPCC does is manufacture an official Bible, twisting the truth to the official narrative as needed. One glance at their too-neat graphs of GAT vs. time shows they forgot to include natural variations, a dead giveaway.

The last five years were the hottest ever recorded

NASA Faked Climate Data Says Retired Top UK Govt Scientist | PSI Intl

2019 Wraps Up The Hottest Decade In Recorded Human History

What happened to the previous record high temperature of 136 degrees in Libya? - Theodore Talbot

The stunning statistical fraud behind the global warming scare

WEAK SKEPTICISM OF PSEUDO-SCIENCE is a crisis. AUDIT reveals New UN Climate Report is 'riddled with errors.' Vivid repeated false media articles of polar bears, sea rise etc. leave the public duped from shoddy science..

The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time — Part XXIV | PSI Intl

Telling The Whole Truth About 'Average' Global Temperature Rises | PSI Intl

Climate skeptics don’t ‘deny science’

Climate Change–The Facts

Paul Noel's answer to Is there a high resolution historical climate dataset that is closer to station data than WorldClim with 5 minutes resolution or better?

John Walker's answer to If temperature records were to indicate that there has been no global warming, would alarmists be happy about it, or would they be angry about being wrong?

THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM by Vincent Gray pdf. My annotations added.The global warming scam is the result of the widespread belief in a new religion, based on the deification of a nebulous entity, “The Environment”.

John Walker's answer to What’s the best single argument for global warming that is undeniable?

Paul Noel's answer to How are millennia, ages or eras worth of inference made about global warming with perhaps two centuries of data?

Deceptive temperature record claims Warmest month announcements have no scientific basis

The IPCC’s so-called climate scientists also talk about Earth’s average temperature as if it can be viewed from space like a star and its radiation measured, assuming that radiation out will equal radiation in, when that can’t be true because a lot of the incoming solar radiation ends up being converted to work to generate winds and storms.

Atmospheric circulation - Wikipedia

Too bad, one of their big lies is their claim that the Sun alone can’t keep the Earth from freezing, thus that CO2 is needed to emit “back radiation” to supply the difference with a phony baloney calculation that actually makes the Earth flat, making it seem that CO2-driven AGW doesn’t need further proof. Their CO2-driven AGW theory is a total fake physics hoax, because the atmosphere can never rewarm the surface with its own radiation any more than a blanket can rewarm your body with its own radiation but only slow the cooling. The entire atmosphere slows removal of surface solar heat to space, keeping the surface within livable limits at night, and converts heat to work to create wind and weather 24/7/365, lowering the amount of radiation reemitted to space and making the radiation balance viewpoint meaningless. All along only the Sun heats the Earth’s surface, and CO2 does nothing in the atmosphere, only being useful at the surface in feeding plant life. Actually, the atmosphere's pressure caused by gravity heats the atmosphere too, providing a constant amount of warming with height called the lapse rate. Each day solar energy is deposited on the Earth's surface then radiated, convected, and evaporated back to space, adding no net heat to the atmosphere, whose great weight and pressure alone keeps it from freezing.

Lapse rate - Wikipedia

TL Winslow's answer to How much does the Sun contribute to global warming?

Climate prediction models are all rigged to produce false “proof” of human-caused climate change




TLW's New Real Climate Science Course

Historyscoper Home Page







© Copyright by T.L. Winslow. All Rights Reserved.