Quote of the day—Tim Ball

Figure 2 provides a brief context to show the wider natural range of temperature over the last 10,000 years. It shows the temperature of the Northern Hemisphere derived from Greenland ice cores.

Figure 2.

The current temperature is on the right (red line). Some salient points that expose the lies and distortions;
* The world was warmer than today for 97 percent of the last 10,000 years, a period known variously as the Climatic Optimum, or more recently the Holocene Optimum. We have known about this warmer period for at least 75 years.

* The world was 2°C warmer than today 1000 years ago during the Medieval warming. Remember, you are told that the world is going to warm by 2°C, and that is catastrophic.

* The world was 4°C warmer than today during the Minoan warming.

* We are told the amount and rate of temperature increase in the last 100 years (shown in red) is abnormal. Compare the slope with any of the previous increases.

* The green line indicates the larger trend and shows that the Earth has cooled for approximately the last 7000 years.
The CO2 changes over this period, but those changes follow the temperature. The global warming proponents tell the public it is the opposite.

Tim Ball
August 1, 2016
Dr. Tim Ball: How the world was deceived about global warming and climate change
[Assuming Figure 2 is factual data then this would seem to be conclusive evidence that nearly everything the fear mongering climate change people claim is false.—Joe]


18 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Tim Ball

  1. Ball can’t be correct! How can you foster social engineering, induce collective guilt, and ultimately control everyone’s actions by saying that the status quo is normal?

  2. Status quo or not, it doesn’t matter. We did not become the dominate species on the planet by being stagnate. Adapt or die. I chose adapt.

    • Adaptation is important, but it depends on your actual meaning. If the Maldive Islands go underwater, the appropriate adaptation is for the inhabitants to move the hell off the flooded island, but try to throw chockstones in front of the the inexorable movement of the climate wheel to try to reverse changes in sea level.

      And we became the dominant species on earth because sheer happenstance wiped out most of the prior dominant species at various stages in earth’s history – the dinosaur extinctions being only the most commonly known, and actually one of the least catastrophic. If a gamma burst occurs nearby, say goodbye to man’s dominance on earth, too.

      • We don’t need no high-tech gamma burst from some gigantic ball of fusing gases! A simple SMOD will do, just as it did for the dinosaurs.

  3. None of that matters because governments don’t have the authority, or power, or anything, to mandate, dictate or control, or even influence global temperatures. The very idea is insane. Someone points a gun at you, telling you to do what he says or (fill in the blank – the stars will fall out of the sky or whatever) then he’s criminally insane. kill him.

  4. I have come to conclude that AGW proponents are just as deceptive and delusional as anti-gun people. Is it coincidence they are frequently the same? Anyway, AGW is their religion, and no amount of facts, graphs, figures, or open-sourced data will convince them they are wrong. We are destroying the planet, and you need to pay for your carbon offsets. Conveniently, they have a clearing house for such a thing, and they accept all major credit cards……

    • AGW = “anthropogenic global warming” or “anti-gun weasels”, take your pick.

  5. p.s. how about a new hysteria? gotta have something new for when “global warming” gives up the ghost. to my mind, the graph show that the energy output of the sun is falling over time.

    how about the “sun cooling” caused by humans wearing sunglasses? or, maybe, “sun failing.” i propose these slogans for the next hysteria. it may be used interchangeably w/ “the sky is falling.”

  6. I can’t help but note, while we’re on the subject, that warming periods tend to coincide with eras of relative prosperity. This makes sense; it’s HARD to get things done in winter time, that is if you’re doing them yourself, instead of outsourcing your tasks the way regressives do. Note that the environment is also hurt far more by ice ages than by global warming; AGW mostly wipes out poorly competitive species, whereas ice ages leave barren major portions of continents. Basically, then, Michael Mann and his cohorts are saying war on progress and the environment.

  7. If the scale on the right margin is temperature, it appears to be inverted. I have
    requested clarification from the author.

    • The scale numbers are negative. Less negative is warmer. Scale looks OK to me.

      • Yup. Remember, this is ice. Temperature has to be negative (I assume the Celsius scale is used).

        • But it’s not ice.
          “It shows the temperature of the Northern Hemisphere derived from Greenland ice cores.”

          Not the ice temp. The things that look like (-) symbols could be tick marks.

          • The original (well, pretty much) data file I uploaded from NOAA says that the temperature is given in degrees Celsius. And yes, the numbers are all negative.

  8. The obvious question to be asked is “what is the source of that data”. That’s especially true with climate data, which is often tampered with. Not usually in this direction, though.
    Google quickly turned up what appears to be the raw data, at ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt :

    GISP2 Ice Core Temperature and Accumulation Data.
    IGBP PAGES/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology
    Data Contribution Series #2004-013.
    NOAA/NGDC Paleoclimatology Program, Boulder CO, USA.

    The description states:

    Temperature interpretation based on stable isotope analysis, and ice accumulation data, from the GISP2 ice core, central Greenland. Data are smoothed from original measurements published by Cuffey and Clow (1997), as presented in Figure 1 of Alley (2000).

    Ok, so we have the usual problem with “raw” data — it says “smoothed”. It is entirely unclear what that means. (I’m reminded of a very large data set I found some years ago, which seemed to be raw data of all US weather stations going back to when they started. But it turned out to be “adjusted”, in particular “adjusted for seasonal variations”. So I tossed it since I couldn’t tell how it had been distorted.) In this case, it’s probably ok, since smoothing — if that in fact is all they did — won’t distort the trends.
    So anyway, the chart in the article matches what the raw data shows. There’s one key point, though: the rightmost point on that graph is not today; it is 95 years ago, which is the most recent data point in that dataset. I don’t believe that invalidates the conclusion, but it does raise the question what the line looks like for more recent times. I saw somewhere an explanation for why it doesn’t show more recent data: it’s an ice core, and it takes some years before snow is compressed into ice.

  9. You can look at the history of human civilization and there is a strong correlation between golden ages of various groups and warmer periods. The Romans are a prime example of this. Basically when the world is colder, it’s harder to grow food, and it’s really hard to do grand things when you’re just struggling to eat….

Comments are closed.