Killing truth by degrees

The last two days in Auckland have been?very warm days. There were a few wisecracks around it being global warming. The ?official? temperature in Auckland was around 29 degrees. But hang on a minute. It was 31? in Botany and only 28? in Piha. So is 29? an average? No, there is only one recording place. So there were large areas of Auckland that were not 29?. Could 29? be categorised as ?an average? for Auckland? We could try but it would not be accurate. We don?t know which areas were 31? and which were 29?. We don?t know how big those areas were. Some places may have been 27?. Some temperatures were recorded at midday others at 3.00pm. Recording temperature is problematic, nigh impossible.

OK, so what if we take one spot and record the temperature every day at exactly the same time wouldn?t that give us a pattern over time? ?Yes, but what pattern? Take Botany. Fifty years ago it was open fields. Now it?s all tin roofs, tarseal and concrete. That would distort the pattern.

So let’s take Botany out and use the other recordings around Auckland. Piha might work but Auckland City is also distorted by growing urbanisation. For historical accuracy, using temperature recordings in Auckland is well-nigh useless.

Who cares? Who can ?feel? a one-degree change in temperature anyway? Not too many people I guess but a degree difference in global warming land is massive. In the rarefied atmosphere of global warming a tenth of a degree is hugely statistically significant.

Over the last month the climate change enthusiasts have been crowing about 2015 being the hottest year on record. It broke the record by 0.02? F. Wow! One fifth of one tenth of one degree. Did you feel that? Take your shirt off? ?

The concerning aspect of the 0.02? F claim is that it is a lie. It?s a hoax, a deception, a ?mis-spoke? to use Clintonesque.

It wasn?t some junior staffer noting the temperature on the thermometer on the office wall who made the claim. It was NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a Federal Agency established under the USA Department of Commerce. It is regularly recognised as one of three top institutions dealing with climate and weather.

Could they be wrong? They were not only wrong but they managed to snooker themselves.?? They were both wrong and deceptive. You see, back in 1997 they said that a new record had been set at 62.45? F. In late 2015 the head of NOAA announced that even higher record had been established at 58.62? F. Now, my old maths teacher would tell you that I wasn?t the sharpest math pencil in the drawer but somehow even I can figure out that 62.45 is higher than 58.62.


What was deceptive was that the calculations for 2015?s high were shrouded in mathematical gobbledygook. NOAA used anomalies and weasel words to try and mask their lies. Of course, the announcement was accompanied by extravagant, unscientific language about disasters, catastrophes and the end of the pause. (The week before they were denying any pause.)

MSN chimed in with their own siren songs. No questioning, no scrutiny and no apologies when it was pointed out that a deception had been perpetrated.

Why would NOAA bother? There is growing frustration with the temperature record. Despite all sorts of horseplay the pause continues. Worse, this is an El Nino year and the warmists were crowing of a ?Godzilla? of an event. Yes, it was going to be bigger that 1998. They were desperate for El Nino to shoot temperatures off the known charts. It hasn?t happened. El Nino is in decline. It didn?t deliver. Moderate climate scientists are suggesting it is because of a period of global cooling setting in. In the Big Apple they are wholeheartedly agreeing.


Land and sea temperature records have been massaged to get a warming trend where possible but satellites are proving the warming does not exist. When the satellites first went up NOAA was excitedly telling everyone, ?Now, we have accuracy.? ? Their ?2015 is the hottest year yet? didn?t even mention the satellite record. What charlatans.

Once again the facts have gotten in the way of a ?good story?. Climate change is further debunked and science is discredited.