Well, we have new data and analysis regarding that much-ballyhooed \u201cglobal warming\u201d we keep hearing about.<\/p>\n
Briton Christopher Monkton has done a least-squares regression on Remote Sensing Systems\u2019 satellite-based monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature data. This dataset goes back 17 years and 11 months \u2013 to October 1996 – or almost two decades.<\/p>\n
Wanna take a guess at how much global warming he found when the trendline of that dataset was plotted using least squares regression?<\/p>\n
Try none. Zip. Nada.<\/a><\/p>\n Let\u2019s put that in perspective. What this means is that the youngsters who graduated from high school this year have not seen any measurable global warming during their lifetime<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n Monkton\u2019s not alone in making this assertion. Professor Ross McKitrick, Universtiy of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, has conducted a similar study using somewhat different methodology<\/a>. McKitrick\u2019s conclusion? There has been no appreciable global warming since 1995 \u2013 or for a period of approximately 19 years<\/em>.<\/p>\n Global warming may be occurring. Or it may not. We simply don\u2019t know at this point.\u00a0 If it’s occurring at all – which seems not<\/span> to be the case, based on the last 18 or 19 years of measured, accurate data – we do not know why with any certainty.\u00a0 We just don\u2019t understand the Earth\u2019s climate well enough at present to make any meaningful predictions whatsoever.<\/p>\n But one thing is certain: presenting \u201cglobal warming\u201d as \u201csettled science\u201d is, to be blunt, absolute bullsh!t. The data for the past nearly two decades \u2013 which just happens to be the best and most accurate data available – simply doesn\u2019t seem to support that theory.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"