Environmental doomsayers may still be claiming that we must radically reduce carbon-dioxide and other “greenhouse” gas emissions in order to prevent catastrophic global warming, but they cling to that position despite the fact that the warming they’ve been forecasting has not occurred. In fact, the average global temperature has gone down, not up, in recent years.

The graph at this link from icecap.us shows that the average global temperature has been dropping since at least 2002, even though the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere has been increasing.

A graph based on satellite temperature readings can be found at the appropriately named “algorelied” website. Here the data is put into a 30-year perspective. Markers indicate that the temperature has decreased by 0.74°F (0.39°C) since January 24, 2006. The significance of that date? That’s when Al Gore’s sci-fi-thriller An Inconvenient Truth was released at the Sundance Film Festival. The data showing this cooling trend was taken from thousands of satellite measurements encompassing the entire lower atmosphere of the Earth with an accuracy of 0.01°C. The satellite data is far more accurate than surface temperature measurements, which are limited to the 28 percent of the planet not covered by oceans. (Even in the United States, where one would expect the surface temperature measurements to be more accurate than elsewhere, a recent survey found that only 11 percent of the monitoring stations meet the National Weather Service’s siting requirements.

If we were to extrapolate the change in temperature in the last 42 months since Gore’s movie debut to the year 2100, we would forecast a decrease of 19.9°F (8.8°C) — temperatures not seen since the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago. Is such an extrapolation reliable? Of course not! But that’s the kind of extrapolation game global-warming alarmists like to play.

Still another look at global temperatures and alarmist predictions comes from EPA analyst Alan Carlin, who shows graphically in a March 2009 report (pdf) how IPCC temperature projections and reality diverge. Carlin’s graph is located on page four of his report. As he explains on the following page, the red, purple, and orange lines on his graph show IPCC temperature predictions assuming different emission scenarios; the yellow line shows what the IPCC claims would happen if the CO₂ concentration were to remain the same; and the blue and green lines show the actual temperature records based on ground and satellite readings respectively. The blue and green lines — the lines reflecting the actual temperature records — are the only lines dropping instead of climbing on Carlin’s graph. In fact, the actual global temperature has fallen by 0.3°C in just the last three years according to the satellite data.

The EPA document also notes that the actual data conflict with the theory that CO₂ causes temperature to rise:

What’s really rather remarkable, is that since 2000, the rates at which CO₂ emissions and concentrations are increasing have accelerated. According to Canadell et al. (2008), fossil fuel and cement emissions increased by 3.3 percent per year during 2000-2006, compared to 1.3 percent per year in the 1990s.  Similarly, atmospheric CO₂ concentrations increased by 1.93 parts per million per year during 2000-2006, compared to 1.58 ppm in the 1990s. And yet, despite accelerating emission rates and concentrations, there's been no net warming in the 21st century, and more accurately, a decline.

And finally some climate tid-bits from the Climate Depot that keeps up with such things:

• Cape Cod farmers lose crops due to “June that felt more like April”

• NYC has coolest June since 1958

• Another new low temperature at Bryce Canyon:  June 6th, 20oF.  Record had been 27oF set in 1951

• Every day in June was below normal in Los Angeles since temperature records began in 1944.

Why don’t global-warming alarmists address the issue of the recent decline in global temperatures? It raises questions about their real agenda, does it not?

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (9)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Flu-Bird said:

Green lies All this gren crap about this whole GLOBAL WARMING is nothing but lies being perpatraited on us all by a bunch of green scam artists and AL GORE is the biggist scam artists of them all

July 11, 2009

Thomas R. Eddlem said:

Global Cooling Means Global Warming!! Oh, No! This is the PROOF we have global warming! The more it cools, the warmer it gets. It's all because of all that ice melting and stuff... Yeah, that's the ticket! Ummm.... the global warming is being caused by the polar icecaps melting and cooling of the seas, and thus global cooling is being caused by global warming. Just ask Al Gore!

July 12, 2009

Flu-Bird said:

Green bunk This whole idea that GLOBAL WARMING leads to more snow was the same bunch of poppycock that JAMES HANEN tried to pawn off on us and blabbered out by AL GORE and the GREENPEACE wackos

July 12, 2009

Dr. Goldstein said:

Record Cold in 46 states last month - where is the media ? Thank You for this article. Our friends at the IceAgeNow website have compiled official NOAA data that shows Record low temperatures in 46 states during June Obviously, if it was record heat in 46 states, Al Gore would be thumping his chest and the mainstream media would be all over it like white on rice. It's a perfect example of why newspapers and TV-news are failing. People have to go on the internet to get the truth. Peace

July 12, 2009 | url

Jim said:

... Too bad we don't have an objective media to tell Americans the truth about this farce instead of the controlled opposition they really are. It's all about government power, control and global governance. The Earth is 4.55 billion years old and they haven't been keeping accurate records for much more than 150 years, if that, and they want us to believe this nonsense?

July 12, 2009

Lee Gonzales said:

sarcasm Even if it were warming, that doesn't spell doom. The New American writer Michael Telzrow,wrote a piece some time back about this particular history. He wrote about the settlement of Greenland by the Vikings when it was profitable to farm that land. The warming of the planet during the medieval warming period translated into an era of overall properity. Literally! It was the time of the great cathedral building and plentiful crops that supported the agrarian based economy. Those crops need a warm climate and the period known as the medieval warming period is a period that the "greenies" either don't know about, or the ones' that do, would rather not dicuss it for obvious reasons.

July 12, 2009

mg said:

... Here in the upper mid-west, we've had a record long, cold winter and now in mid-July unusually cool temps. Had to use my electricl blanket last night!!

July 13, 2009

Captain Gabe said:

Just can't believe "it" If the earth was a basket ball and all of the oil humans would ever pull out of the ground was compared to it, I'll bet it'd be about the size of a pea. Throw that pea into the atmosphere and ignite it and, poof, nothing happens. Some people just "can't believe" that burning millions of barrels of oil a day won't affect the planet because they just don't understand how big the planet is. These are the folks who can't accept that two spaceships, each traveling at the speed of light, moving opposite to each other, are actually traveling at 1x the speed of light from each of their own perspectives. These are the types who count on their fingers, model concepts with their hands, and can't believe anything they can't express in this way. Good luck getting through to such dolts.

July 13, 2009

Lee Gonzales said:

The basket ball analogy Cap'tan Gabe straightens us all out. Yes siree, mates. Cap says to us, he surely does with this bit of wives tale: "Some people just "can't believe" that burning millions of barrels of oil a day won't affect the planet because they just don't understand how big the planet is." Will you join us in promoting Nuclear there Capy? It is after all the cleanest, cheapest and safest form of creating electricty. Then you won't have to worry 'bout the release of Carbon dioxide into the atmosphere whenever you drive to those "greenie" conventions. And about that Co2. Don't plants require it for their metabolism? The more the better for the trees, right? You are a "tree hugger" so why not give those trees what they yearn for - Co2! Co2 is good for the economy and for the environment. What is bad for the economy are "greenie" who think that they know science.

July 13, 2009