https://www.technocracy.news/index.php/2016/05/27/like-germany-denmark-admits-wind-power-generation-expensive/

Temperatures during the period from about 1944 to 1975 directly contradict the global warming hypothesis. This was the period of recovery from WWII when industrial growth was very fast, and gasoline engines were in mass production and use. Little attention was paid to combustion efficiency in vehicles, factories or homes. CO2 emissions and atmospheric concentration of CO2 as well as actual air pollution was growing consistently. But the temperature trend declined for about 30 years.

According to hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and the CO2 forcing parameter, the temperature trend should have been rising, not falling. At the time, the press and experts were reporting global cooling and many expected a new ice age.

Now in 2016 climate experts want to “adjust” the data for this cooling period, so that the cooling disappears, because it reveals their alarmist claims of global warming/climate change are a fraud…a way to extract money and political power from citizens, companies and states.

You might keep this graph to compare as the data are “adjusted.”

Newsweek, 1975

References

(1)  For graph:  http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us/110/0/tavg/1/4/1944-1975?base_prd=true&firstbaseyear=1895&lastbaseyear=1944&trend=true&trend_base=100&firsttrendyear=1944&lasttrendyear=1975

(2) About NOAA adjusting data:  http://www.examiner.com/article/how-noaa-rewrote-climate-data-to-hide-global-warming-pause

One is wisdom, knowledge and virtue.

Be one with the river, but never loose the last line.  Then, there is no choice and soon the river becomes ocean.  Be aware of that line lest you stretch it too far.  Then, the relation is lost and inevitably we build a cross.

“The longest NOAA tide gauge data record is at the Battery, New York with a 160 year long measurement period. This location along with all other U.S. coastal locations show no sea level rise acceleration.”

“Climate alarmists continue to try and mislead the public by claiming  that the Statue of Liberty is in “imminent jeopardy” because of rising sea levels but the unchanging rate of sea level rise present at the Battery would require more than 20,000 years to cover the base.  That time period hardly qualifies as “imminent jeopardy”.”

It is well to remind readers that if there were a trend of increasing global warming caused by the increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration that results from the increased combustion of fossil fuels by humans that began during the industrial revolution, then, if that were true, water in the oceans would be expanding and an acceleration in the rise of sea level would be measured. The fact that there is no acceleration is yet another confirmation that there is no increased global warming due to humans.

At the following link is the excellent post of the May 28, 2016 blog in WattsUpWithThat dot com.

Maturity diagram showing net change since 17 May 2008 in the global monthly surface air temperature record prepared by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), USA [part of NOAA]. The net result of the adjustments made are becoming substantial, and adjustments since May 2006 occasionally exceeds 0.1^oC. Before 1945 global temperatures are generally changed toward lower values, and toward higher values after 1945, resulting in a more pronounced 20th century warming (about 0.15^oC) compared to the NCDC temperature record published in May 2008.

http://www.climate4you.com/

“Let me say it as simply as I can. Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”- Obama at his swearing-in ceremony, January 21, 2009 (1)

This is a problem. Thanks to Obama voters, we are moving rapidly to the politburo stage of socialism.

The following is by Luke Rosiak (link below with video).

Headline:  Obama Admin Deletes Conflict Of Interest Disclosures For Top Bureaucrats [VIDEO] (2)

Conflict of interest disclosure reports filed by top federal officials were removed from public view by the Obama administration in recent months, a move that government transparency and accountability advocates condemn as a major setback.

The Office of Government Ethics (OGE) reports are the primary tool that watchdog journalists, political activists and interested voters can use to guard against presidential appointees using their positions to enrich themselves or others.

For years, the OGE website featured a sortable, searchable list of over 1,000 government appointees, including their names, agencies and titles, and flagging new ones. By clicking on a name, users could easily access multiple disclosures for the appointee, including yearly financial accounting, stock ownership and a letter detailing any agreements surrounding conflicts, such as issues when the individual promises to recuse himself.

By January, the list was inexplicably removed, leaving only a search box. That action severely reduced the chance of officials’ finances being scrutinized because it became necessary to know the name of a person and have a reason to want to look up that individual, as opposed to, for example, looking for listings from an agency of interest.

Now, even that capability is gone, along with almost all references to actually seeing the disclosures. Thousands of PDFs have also been deleted, leaving dead links.

OGE referred press calls to Seth Jaffe, who didn’t respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s query placed on Monday.

“This is a problem,” Daniel Schuman, a policy analyst at the liberal group Demand Progress, told TheDCNF. “They should put it back. It’s very odd there’s no explanation.”

John Wonderlich, head of the transparency group the Sunlight Foundation, called it a “big step backward,” saying “the administration should be demonstrating how digital disclosure should strengthen our accountability systems, and creating barriers to access is the opposite of progress.”

Previously, Sunlight had praised President Barack Obama, who had pledged at the outset of his first term in the Oval Office to have the “most transparent [administration] in history.”

The OGE documents also include “ethics waivers,” documents that showed despite Obama making pledges such as not to appoint former lobbyists, this was frequently done.

Thanks to the disclosures, the public recently learned that Secretary of State John Kerry has millions invested in offshore tax havens. The disclosures also showed that Medicare chief Andy Slavitt took actions relating to firms he had financial ties to, and that he got a waiver to do so.

OGE’s role as an independent entity is important in serving as a check against self-interested departments. The disclosures showed that the Medicare agency lied about Slavitt getting preferential tax treatment.

They also showed a former union lawyer who was appointed to head a labor relations agency steered lucrative contracts to his old law firm despite signing an agreement saying he “will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which Bredhoff & Kaiser is a party or represents a party unless I am first authorized.”

The site’s menu now says nothing about viewing disclosures, but buried several clicks in to a section called “Media” allows you to fill out a form requiring highly specific information about a person and the disclosure you are requesting.

When TheDCNF called to inquire about the change, the form had to be sent in via snail mail. Soon after the call, they added a cumbersome online form that was submitted to an employee who supposedly would send the documents several days later.

TheDCNF filled out the form and several days later, got rejected without explanation.

“The records that you requested are not maintained in the Office of Government Ethics. Please contact the employing agency/agencies for these records,” Irene Houston wrote.

(1) http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2009/01/obama012109.html

(2)  http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/25/obamas-admin-deletes-conflict-of-interest-disclosures-for-top-bureaucrats/#ixzz49suysMJz

“Observations of the global energy budget and their implications” (9)

“The rate of global mean warming has been lower over the past decade than previously. It has been argued (1–5) that this observation might require a downwards revision of estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity, that is, the long-term (equilibrium) temperature response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.”

“Using up-to-date data on radiative forcing, global mean surface temperature and total heat uptake in the Earth system, we find that the global energy budget (6) implies a range of values for the equilibrium climate sensitivity that is in agreement with earlier estimates, within the limits of uncertainty.”

“The energy budget of the most recent decade does, however, indicate a lower range of values for the more policy-relevant (7) transient climate response (the temperature increase at the point of doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration following a linear ramp of increasing greenhouse gas forcing) than the range obtained by either analysing the energy budget of earlier decades or current climate model simulations. (8)

“Our results match those of other observation-based studies (15) and suggest that the TCRs of some of the models in the CMIP5 ensemble (10) with the strongest climate response to increases in atmospheric CO2 levels may be inconsistent with recent observations —“

They explain, “The best estimate of TCR [transient climate response] based on OBSERVATION of the most recent decade is 1.3 °C (0.9–2.0 °C;) This is lower than estimates derived from data of the 1990s 1.6 °C (0.9–3.1 °C); or for the 1970–2009 period as a whole 1.4 °C (0.7–2.5 °C)”

But here is the key:  “within the limits of uncertainty.”  Note that the limits of uncertainty are huge, plus or minus 50% of their best estimate of the MEASURED average temperature.  They are betting our money on a coin toss using a formula that is not good at predicting coin tosses.

They are acknowledging that climate models predicted temperatures that were too high. A doubling of CO2 does not produce as much temperature increase as they expected, even though they gave themselves a huge margin of error.  So they want to try again.  They are addicted.

By analogy, the government bet over $100 billion of our money that the Dow Jones stock market average would finish at 14,000.  It didn’t.  But within the limits of uncertainty the government stock brokers gave themselves, the Dow could have been at 7,000 or at 25,000 and the government would still consider that the bet with our money was reasonable.  We lost our $100 billion and now they will lower their best estimate and bet some more of our money.  Think gambling addiction.

References

1. Aldrin, M. et al. Environmetrics 23, 253–271 (2012).
2. Lewis, N. J. Clim. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00473.1 (2013).
3. Ring, M. J., Lindner, D., Cross, E. F. & Schlesinger, M. E. Atmos. Clim. Sci. 2, 401–415 (2012).
4. Stott, P. A., Good, P., Jones, G., Gillett, N. P. & Hawkins, E. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 014024 (2013).
5. Schwartz, S. E. Surv. Geophys. 33, 745–777 (2012).
6. Gregory, J. M. & Forster, P. M. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 113, D23105 (2008).
7. Allen, M. R. & Frame, D. J. Science 318, 582–583 (2007).
8. Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2011).
9. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/76064/7/ngeo1836%281%29_with_coversheet.pdf
10. 10. Forster, P. M. et al. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118, 1–12 (2013)
11. Gillett, N. P., Arora, V. K., Matthews, D. & Allen, M. R. J. Clim. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00476.1 (2013).

In the technical journal article on climate models at the link below, “Causes of the Global Warming Observed since the 19th Century,” these orthodox climate modelers acknowledge the current cooling period as well as the cooling period that occurred from 1945 to 1976.  In instances when their models predict warming based input of empirical measurements as known values in their math functions and eliminating all the other variables they think they know, then they claim warming is due to human-produced greenhouse gas.  But, in other instances when their models don’t predict warming temperature, they conclude that the cooling is due to natural internal variabilities which offset their forcing parameter.

Bottom line, they use the forcing parameter as a plug in their models.  A plug is an assumption, not proof.  It plugs in a value or a math function that makes the model produce the expected answer when all the other variables are believed to be known.  Then the climate modelers conclude that their models agree with measured temperatures based on their assumptions.  Use of a plug along with elimination of other variables is a logically valid tool to aid in development of a mathematical model.  But, until the model containing the plug works under all conditions, it is only a hypothesis…that is, speculation.

They conclude it is going to rain tomorrow unless it does not rain.

The simple way to understand the invalidity of climate models is that they failed to predict the current, ongoing, statistically flat period which has so far lasted 18 years.  Instead of predicting statistically flat temperature, their climate models predicted rapidly rising temperatures which they claimed would result in no ice at the poles, more hurricanes, the end of polar bears, mass starvation, rapid rise of sea level, etc among a seemingly never ending list of catastrophes intended to scare people into giving them more money.

If they had a model that worked under all conditions, then there would be only one model, not many models.  If they had a model that worked, Obama, De Caprio, Gore, Kerry, and a small group of climate conference parasites would not be flying around in jets spewing greenhouse gases.  In this case, the model does not fit, so we must convict.

So far, there is only one model that closely tracks actual temperatures.  That model is by the Russians.  The Russian model so far has only been used for a few conditions.  The Russian model is the dashed magenta line that touches the actual temperature in 2015.  It is worthwhile to remind readers that the Russians have declined to support the UN global climate agenda.

http://file.scirp.org/pdf/ACS20120400002_59142760.pdf

Memory leak

“Fixed memory leak that occurs when opening a portable document format (PDF) form multiple times.” ~ Microsoft. (1)

Gee, I wonder who would want to do that?

References:

1. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10/update-history-windows-10