Advertisements

Sharp Drop In RSS Satellite Temperatures In May

Temperatures for last two months well below same period of 1998 El Niño.

Interesting to see how the fraud squad over at the ministry’s of truth – NASA & NOAA – will report the sharp decline in atmospheric temps, post El Niño.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Global_Land_And_Sea_v03_3

http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html

RSS have now published their May data, showing a big month on month fall of 0.23C, an even bigger drop than UAH.

Temperatures are now back to below December levels.

Comparison shows that temperatures for the last two months are well below the same period in 1998. Given the continuing and rapid drop in Nino region SSTs since November, lower troposphere temperatures are likely to fall much more in coming months, even before the onset or otherwise of any La Nina.

image

http://data.remss.com/msu/graphics/TLT/time_series/RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Global_Land_And_Sea_v03_3.txt

View original post

Advertisements

Expert: Scientists exaggerated coral bleaching story

What other falsehoods are environmental activists like Tim Flannery and complicit media – ABC, Fairfax, The Age, BBC, CNN etc etc, willing to spread in order to push their ever-dangerous global warming agenda?

I say dangerous, as this particular incident of blatant climate change alarmism endagers Australia’s international reputation, especially its tourist industry and the livelihoods of the good people who are employed in the region.

Who will be made accountable or held responsible for the blatant lies, exaggeration of data and wreckless alarmism? No one, of course. Because again, the worst any Reef or climate change alarmist can ever be accused of is an excess of virtue, in order to “Save the planet”.

Watts Up With That?

Cam Jones writes via Tips and notes:

This is a biggie. What makes it a biggie is that the Head of the Government-run department is speaking out against intentionally bias claims of climate change induced destruction of the Great Barrier Reef

Great Barrier Reef: scientists ‘exaggerated’ coral bleaching

By Graham Lloyd -The Australian

There is growing scientific conflict over bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Picture: Tourism Queensland

There is growing scientific conflict over bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Picture: Tourism Queensland

Activist scientists and lobby groups have distorted surveys, maps and data to misrepresent the extent and impact of coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, ­according to the chairman of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Russell Reichelt.

A full survey of the reef ­released yesterday by the author­ity and the Australian Institute of Marine ­Science said 75 per cent of the reef would escape unscathed.

Dr Reichelt said the vast bulk of bleaching damage was confined to the far northern section…

View original post 494 more words


Scientific American joins the Push for Emission Free Nuclear Power

Good news. And a tacit admission that ‘unreliable’ energy alternatives, wind and solar, simply cannot supply affordable, efficient and reliable baseload power.

Watts Up With That?

Susquehanna steam electric nuclear power station Susquehanna steam electric nuclear power station

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Scientific American reports increasing interest in using nuclear power to lower US CO2 emissions – but Presidential wannabe Bernie Sanders has vowed to decommission all US nuclear power plants.

The Nuclear Option Could Be Best Bet to Combat Climate Change

To cut CO2 pollution, experts argue for nuclear power.

Many analysts are now calling not just to preserve existing nuclear power plants, but to invest in new designs to help fight climate change. “A new round of innovation for nuclear reactors would be quite important,” said Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz last month.

Across the United States, nuclear provides 20 percent of all electricity and more than 60 percent of greenhouse gas-free electricity. But some plants have already shut down ahead of schedule, and others may do so, as well, not because of environmental opposition but because…

View original post 619 more words