Meteorologist Debunks TIME Mag’s Claim That Jan 2024 Was Hottest On Record

Climate Lie Debunked

An article in TIME Magazine (TIME) claims that January 2024 was the hottest ever on record for the planet. Titled, 2024 Had the Hottest January on Record Following 2023’s Hottest Year on Record the article is based on a single source of temperature data.

Data from multiple other sources of temperature measurements refute this claim. [emphasis, links added]

TIME refers to the Copernicus EU climate service as the source for its alarming claim. Copernicus EU issued a press release claiming:

January 2024 was the warmest January on record globally, with an average ERA5 surface air temperature of 13.14°C, 0.70°C above the 1991-2020 average for January and 0.12°C above the temperature of the previous warmest January, in 2020.

The month was 1.66°C warmer than an estimate of the January average for 1850-1900, the designated pre-industrial reference period.

The problem with that is that they are using a reference period of 1850 to 1900 that no other climate data source uses; a period, not coincidentally, more than 100 years of global warming ago when the Earth was cooler than today.

For example, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) produced a map of the globe that shows a significantly lower global temperature for January 2024.

The GISS global value was just 1.20°C compared to the 1.66°C claimed by Copernicus is different because NASA GISS is using a base period of 1951 to 1980.

Copernicus seemingly cherry-picked the reference period to fit the climate crisis narrative, and TIME was too uninterested in seeking and presenting the truth to investigate the extraordinary claim, instead reporting it as an unchallenged fact.

When you look at satellite temperature data compiled by the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), the “hottest January ever” claim also falls apart:

The satellite’s global temperature value is just 0.86°C, essentially half of what Copernicus claims at 1.66°C.

While it is not the globe, the United States (U.S.) is often cited as being a leading metric for climate change by both media and scientific sources. This is because the U.S. has more temperature stations per land area than any other region included in the global climatological network.

As such, its readings have an outsized impact on global average temperature measurements.

Yet when you examine the data from the US Climate Reference Network (USCRN), the best and most state-of-the-art surface measurement system in the world, we find that not only was January 2024 not the hottest on the record it was below normal in temperature:

At -0.14°F (-0.08°C), there is certainly no cause for alarm about temperature in the United States. Yet TIME does not mention any of these other sources.

It gets worse than the simple subversion of science by omission of critical facts. TIME quoted a spokesperson for Copernicus in the article:

Rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are the only way to stop global temperatures increasing,” Samantha Burgess, deputy director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, said in a statement.

That statement is nothing more than political advocacy calling for the reduction of greenhouse gases through restrictions of economies, rather than simply reporting the science. By using that quote, TIME is complicit in pushing advocacy over science.

https://climatechangedispatch.com/meteorologist-debunks-time-mags-claim-that-jan-2024-was-hottest-on-record/

CO2 Perspective

CO2 Perspective

Michael De Armon commented:
We actually need MORE C02. We are at like 330ppm, and at like 200 plant life ceases to exist.
Just 50 years ago we were at like 400ppm. If we want big beautiful plants, we need more CO2. I mean, CO2 for them is what Oxygen is for us.

I replied:
One could be forgiven for wondering if that is not for what the depopulationists are striving!

Introducing the Unfinished Third Geoengineering Film of Michael J. Murphy

Unconventional Grey

A Message From Elana Freeland Regarding the Newly Surfaced and Unfinished Documentary, UNconventional Grey – August 2023

The unfinished third documentary UNconventional Grey by Michael J. Murphy has been missing in action since 2016, the year Murphy had planned to release it. It is his third film of truth-telling about Geoengineering, the other two being

What in the World Are They Spraying? (2010) and
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DRkZXNAIVgDs/
Why in the World Are They Spraying? (2012).
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DRkZXNAIVgDs/

Michael’s targeting began in 2012, just after Why in the World debuted in Los Angeles at the Consciousness Beyond Chemtrails Conference—just as he began organizing for a third film that, unlike his first two films, would not just wake the public up but rally activists around the Aerosol Collection Project while filling in their grasp of how geoengineering entails crimes against humanity because of an operating agenda for global political power. The objective of the character assassination Michael was subjected to by the usual federally protected perpetrators and “insider” trusted colleagues was about preventing the production of his third documentary UNconventional Grey. Michael managed to rally from the post-2012 assault and to all but complete UNconventional Grey before yet another, even more brutal assault began at the same time that a remarkably similar assault began on the great Canadian activist Suzanne Maher who was spreading chemtrails awareness billboards across Ontario.

And here we are, seven years late and minus a final edit and public debut. UNconventional Grey is now available. We can now hear the thoughtful testimony of Michael Murphy, Marvin Herndon, Patrick Wood, Scott Stevens, Allan Buckmann, Max Bliss, David Lewis, Ed Griffin, Princess Basma Saud of Saudi Arabia, Rosa Koire, Cynthia McKinney, myself, etc. Rosa Koire is now dead (May 31, 2021), as is Michael Murphy (July 22, 2020). Both Michael and Rosa were critics of globalism; both died young.

It is imperative to emphasize that the classified Geoengineering program entailing weather engineering, chemical / electromagnetic engineering, geophysical engineering, directed energy weapons, surveillance and neural engineering, nanotechnology, and digital synthetic biology, and hiding and detecting exotic propulsion craft and plasma lifeforms has been run by the CIA under various names since Bernard Eastlund, PhD, was building the powerful ionospheric heater HAARP in Alaska in the 1990s—back when Rosalind Peterson was a California USDA crop inspector and raising her voice against U.S. Navy sonar and the chemical jet trails making a murky cloud cover. In September 2007, Rosalind spoke at the UN 60th Annual DPI/NGO Conference on “Climate Change: How It Impacts Us All.” She died of cancer on February 4, 2018.

The public is mostly unaware of the danger surrounding classified programs like Geoengineering. Kidnapping, homelessness, accusations of “drug addiction,” internet defamation, murder, and mayhem sound decidedly unscientific. Had UNconventional Grey come out in 2016—just four years before the global CV-19 medical/Big Pharma psyop run by the United Nations (UN), World Economic Forum (WEF), and World Health Organization (WHO)—would people have been awake enough to realize what it meant?

UNconventional Grey builds a picture of how Geoengineering—not the “climate change” cover story—leads straight to the UN “sustainable development”/carbons/Agenda 21/2030 master plan. In fact, Geoengineering, with all of its political muscle, is the price of admission to world government as well as the biggest transfer of wealth to the rich ever.

Gratitude to the anonymous person who stumbled upon Michael’s third film, thus flinging his vision upon the waters of chance so that we might take courage from it.

https://stopthecrime.net/wp/2023/08/22/unconventional-grey/

Ad Hominem Attacks on BS Detectors

Climate Scam Invalidation

Seems those who don’t go to university often have the ability to smell bovine manure when it is being spread.

Could it be that attendance at university reinforces the requirement of adherence to the official narrative?

Nah. That’s too much like brain washing.

Antarctic Ice Gains Greater Than Losses – More Proof ‘Climate Change’ Is A Scam

Antarctic Ice Changes

A new NASA study on the Antarctic Ice Sheet says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The study analyzed changes in the surface height of the Antarctic ice sheet measured by radar altimeters on two European Space Agency European Remote Sensing (ERS) satellites, spanning from 1992 to 2001, and by the laser altimeter on NASA’s Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) from 2003 to 2008.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic Ice Sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to present. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica — there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”

Scientists calculate how much the Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the Antarctic Ice Sheet mass grows or shrinks.

https://www.antarcticajournal.com/antarctic-ice-sheet-mass-gains-greater-than-losses/