Another AGW Epic Fail: New Paper Finds Appalachians Have Been Dramatically COOLING Since 1910

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

A new scientific study says surface temperatures in the Northeastern U.S. (Appalachian Mountains) have undergone a significant long-term cooling trend since the early 20th century, complicating the detection of a clear anthropogenic global warming (AGW) signal for the region.

According to Eck (2018), the two coldest Appalachian winters since 1910 were recorded in recent years (2009-’10 and 2010-’11), and 9 of the 10 warmest winters occurred prior to 1960.

In the early 1930s, Appalachian winters were 4.7°C warmer than they have been during the last 30 years (1987-2017).

Several other recently-published papers also reveal a long-term cooling trend not only for the Northeastern U.S. (Eck, 2018), but the Southeastern U.S. (Rogers, 2013; Christy and McNider, 2016), the Central U.S. (Alter et al., 2017), and the Southwestern and Northwestern U.S. (Loisel et al., 2017; Steinman et al., 2016).

In other words, the regions in the continental United States that are less affected by urbanization biases and artificial instrumental heating may not be responding to “global” warming or to the rise in anthropogenic CO2 emissions as climate models have suggested.


Eck, 2018

[A] majority (12/14) of the regions within the SAM [Southern Appalachian Mountains] have experienced a long-term decline in mean winter temperatures since 1910.   Even after removing the highly anomalous 2009-2010 winter season, which was more than two standard deviations away from the long-term mean, the cooling of mean winter temperatures is still evident.”
“Higher winter temperatures dominated the early 20th century in the SAM [Southern Appalachian Mountains] with nine of the ten warmest winter seasons on record in the region having occurred before 1960.”
The 1931-1932 winter season, the warmest on record, averaged 8.0°C for DJF [December-February], nearly 4.7°C higher than the 1987-2017 normal mean winter temperature of 3.3°C.”
“Despite the 2016-2017 winter season finishing with the highest mean temperatures (5.7ºC) observed in the SAM [Southern Appalachian Mountains]  since 1956-1957, there have been several years of anomalous negative temperature anomalies, with the 2009-2010 (0.3ºC) and 2010-2011 (1.2ºC) winter seasons finishing as two of the coldest on record for all regions.”


Central U.S. Cooling (-0.35°C) Since 1910

Alter et al., 2017

“In the central United States … observational data indicate that rainfall increased, surface air temperature decreased, and surface humidity increased during the summer over the course of the 20th century concurrently with increases in both agricultural production and global GHG emissions.”
From 1910- 1949 (pre-agricultural development, pre-DEV) to 1970-2009 (full agricultural development, full-DEV), the central United States experienced large-scale increases in rainfall of up to 35% and decreases in surface air temperature of up to 1°C during the boreal summer months of July and August … which conflicts with expectations from climate change projections for the end of the 21st century (i.e., warming and decreasing rainfall) (Melillo et al., 2014).”
“Thus, it seems that GHG emissions do not contribute greatly to the regional changes in summer climate that have been observed in the central United States.”


Southeastern U.S. Cooling Since 1890s

Rogers, 2013

Christy and McNider, 2016


Long-Term Cooling Trend In The Western U.S.

Loisel et al., 2017

Steinman et al., 2016

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

53 responses to “Another AGW Epic Fail: New Paper Finds Appalachians Have Been Dramatically COOLING Since 1910”

  1. Bitter&twisted

    Is this data before or after “adjustments” and “homogenisation”?
    Either way it is yet another piece of evidence that CO2 works in mysterious ways.
    Most likely not in the way our deluded friend, Seb@stian, thinks.

    1. SebastianH

      Obviously the warming from global warming isn’t the same everywhere and you can even get cooling in places. When only looking at surface temperatures that can also skew the image. The important variable is heat content. Is the global heat content increasing or falling? What do you think?

      P.S.: I too want to know if this is from adjusted temperatures or if they used the raw data and did their own adjustments.

      1. AndyG55

        “Obviously the warming from global warming isn’t the same everywhere”

        No, it certainly isn’t

        The ONLY places that have experienced any REAL warming in the satellite era have been those directly affected by El Nino events and Ocean oscillation.

        The main sources of so-called “global” warming have been :
        a) tampering and manipulation of surface data
        b) bad data quality, due to urban heat and airport placements
        c) a mismatch between mercury thermometers and modern electronic systems of measurement.

        The real fact about the VERY SLIGHT calculated “global average temperature” is that it is still lower than ity has been for MOST of the Holocene

        Its only by comparing current temperatures to a period coming out of the COLDEST PERIOD in 10,000 years and having some manic ideology that says “warming is bad” that you can FABRICATE this AGW nonsense

        As seb well knows, there is absolutely ZERO PROOF that real temperature changes have been ANYTHING BUT NATURAL

        There is ZERO PROOF of any kind of human or CO2 influence on the very slight, but HIGHLY BENEFICIAL warming of our atmosphere or of our oceans.

    2. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

      The key in the chart from ‘Christy and McNider, 2016’ shows that they probably looked at the effect of adjustments.

      My hypothesis – what we’re seeing here is the effect of the moonshine-still fires being snuffed out. (0:|
      https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0796/8333/files/Tips_for_Safe_Distilling_-_Making_Moonshine_in_Kentucky_large.jpg?1034196306335152906

      Seriously, though, it looks like there may be a ~60 year cycle visible in their data. Could it be an AM0/PDO effect?
      http://appinsys.com/globalwarming/SixtyYearCycle.htm

      Naaah, must be CO2. //SARC OFF//

  2. Bitter&twisted

    “NASA data must be fake”.
    NASA GISSTEMP data is. Along with James Hansen, the arch adjuster.

    1. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

      If someone tells me the temperature of something for which he has no data, and no way of acquiring any data, I’m going to assume he’s lying.
      https://realclimatescience.com/2017/02/nasa-noaa-climate-data-is-fake-data/

      That’s just one of many examples, as you know, B&t.

      And then there’s the Congressional testimony…
      https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

      …another link on the 60 year cycles.
      http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=2295

    2. AndyG55

      Starts with NCDC, then NOAA, then GISS.

      Its a multi-stage “adjustment™” process.

      Squashing that embarrassing 1940’s peak where-ever they can find it.

      Making sure the temperature keeps climbing, by adjustment.

      Reality doesn’t stand a chance.

      The FARCE is strong with that crew.

      1. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

        I posted this recently, and have yet to get an answer as to why I need these clowns from “skepticalscience” to tell me what a “denier” is.
        http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html

  3. CO2isLife

    Climate “Science” on Trial; Temperature Records Don’t Support NASA GISS
    One of the oddest aspects of climate “science” is that NASA, the organization that put a man on the moon, ignores its state of the art Satellite and balloon data, and instead relies upon archaic terrestrial ground measurements. Part of the NASA climate “science” community actually ignore the infinitely more accurate data from their satellites. The reason … Continue reading
    https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/03/12/climate-science-on-trial-temperature-records-dont-support-nasa-giss/

    Isolating the Contribution of CO2 on Atmospheric Temperature
    In any serious scientific experiment, efforts are made to “control” for as many exogenous factors as possible. The whole purpose is to isolate the impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. ΔWeightloss = ΔCaloric Intake + ΔExercise + error. To minimize the error of the model (maximize explanatory power), variables outside the model (exogenous factors), … Continue reading
    https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/02/14/isolating-the-contribution-of-co2-on-atmospheric-co2/

    1. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

      Nice compilation.

      While I was aware of the closing of the colder stations, I was unaware of their migration South. thx.

    2. SebastianH

      Giss and UAH are almost identical:
      http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/mean:12/from:1979/plot/uah6/mean:12/offset:0.433

      Westpoint is a 100 km north of the Central Park and much farther away from the ocean too. One should think that the climate is a bit different in both locations.

      Be a little bit more skeptic about what your hero Dr. Soon is saying. It’s likely nonsense.

      Applying this concept to climate change, the ideal model would be ΔTemperature = ΔCO2 + error.

      That’s not the model. It doesn’t work like that and trying to argue this way is a big straw man …

      Instead read: http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/ccr/publications/meehl_additivity.pdf

      1. AndyG55

        “Giss and UAH are almost identical:”

        More seb utter BS. !!

        http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:2000/mean:60/offset:-.43/plot/uah6/from:2000/mean:60

        Seb, the ZERO PROOF of CO2 warming AGW sympathiser

        EMPTY.

        1. SebastianH

          Looks a lot like when you compare version 5.6 and 6.0 (the “special” version):
          http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah5/from:2000/mean:60/plot/uah6/from:2000/mean:60

          Doesn’t it?

          Let’s include RSS (version 3 still, I assume) in the mix:
          http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah5/from:2000/mean:60/plot/uah6/from:2000/mean:60/plot/rss/from:2000/mean:60/offset:-0.18

          1. AndyG55

            Seb still doesn’t comprehend the difference between “corrections” for known scientific reasons.. UAH v6

            and “adjustments” from fabricated modelled agenda driven farce.

            So sad, so seb. !!

            RSS V3.3 also has the two NON-WARMING periods that you are RUNNING, SQUIRMING from producing using GISS.

            https://s19.postimg.org/y6om3sbjn/RSS_Before_El_Nino.jpg

            https://s19.postimg.org/im6e8dgxf/RSS_pre_2015.png

            Now stop being a squirming little worm , seb, and produce those two period for GISS,

            PROVE that GISS is nearly identical to UAH and RSS..

            Or have the guts to ADMIT that you were either WRONG..

            or you were INTENTIONALLY and DECEITFULLY LYING.

      2. AndyG55

        “Giss and UAH are almost identical:”

        So seb, if GISS and UAH are almost identical,

        …that means that GISS must have the same two NON-WARMING periods that UAH has, correct?

        You know, those NON-WARMING periods between major El Nino events. 😉

        NO WARMING from 1980 – 1997

        https://s19.postimg.org/iwoqwlg1f/UAH_before_El_nino.png

        NO WARMING from 2001 – 2015

        https://s19.postimg.org/b9yx58cxf/UAH_after_El_nino.png

        Please post matching periods from GISS showing similar NON-WARMING.

        (or do your usual headless-chook style run-and-hide avoidance, accompanied by your usual mindless yapping.)

        1. SebastianH

          I have no words for this nonsense … should I provide you with a graph where I wildly draw in lines showing imagined things?

          Or should we just look at the entire data and don’t pretend that El Ninos don’t stand apart, same as El Ninas don’t stand apart. Both are just moving around energy. They are not adding or subtracting anything to the heat content, except that a warmer surface during El Nino makes the Earth lose more energy to space … which is – surprise – a cooling effect you can see on OHC charts. El Ninos aren’t causing “step changes” in temperatures that stay higher long after the event.

          1. SebastianH

            Should be and don’t pretend that El Ninos don’t stand apart, same as El Ninas don’t stand apart.

          2. AndyG55

            Your MANIC EVASION , as predicted, is duly noted BY EVERYONE. 🙂

            You are SO PREDICTABLE in producing NOTHING but mindless bluster.

          3. AndyG55

            Zero warming between El Ninos, seb

            In both the scientifically corrected UAH6.0 and in the untampered RSSv3.3

            Facts are an anathema to you, aren’t they little brain-hosed child-mind.

            It DESTROYS the AGW farce., and you have ZERO COUNTER, as always.

          4. AndyG55

            Anyone who isn’t WILFULLY BLIND or TOTALLY BRAIN-HOSED can see the 1998 El Nino step and the 2015-2017 El Nino transient.

            the two “events” that AGW sympathisers HAVE to rely upon to show warming in the satellite data.

            They have to rely on them because…

            There is no warming apart from those two major El Ninos

  4. Bitter&twisted

    AndyG55. Knowing Seb, it will be the usual fact-free verbal diarrhoea and some wilful misdirection.

    1. AndyG55

      As predicted. 🙂

  5. dennisambler

    It’s all down to the newly discovered “Warming Hole” that makes things colder….

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180213183555.htm

    “Overwhelming scientific evidence has demonstrated that our planet is getting warmer due to climate change, yet parts of the eastern US are actually getting cooler.

    According to a new study, the location of this anomaly, known as the ‘US warming hole,’ is a moving target. During the winter and spring, the US warming hole sits over the Southeast, as the polar vortex allows arctic air to plunge into the region, resulting in persistently cooler temperatures.”

  6. Steve

    Whether it gets hotter or colder anywhere or everywhere and whether or not it is natural or man made, in the great scheme of things, it will not matter one iota.
    Man adapts to the environment.

  7. Another AGW Epic Fail: New Paper Finds Appalachians Have Been Dramatically COOLING Since 1910 | Un hobby...

    […] Eck, February 15, 2018 in K. Richard […]

  8. Greenland, Antarctica And Dozens Of Areas Worldwide Have Not Seen Any Warming In 60 Years And More!

    […] writer Kenneth Richard provided in a comment an abbreviated list of locations across the globe that have not seen any warming over the past 60 […]

  9. New Study: U.S. Appalachians Dramatically COOLING Since 1910 | Principia Scientific International

    […] Read more at notrickszone.com […]

  10. 1875 coldest year in 10000 years and no warming for 58 years | Roald J. Larsen

    […] writer Kenneth Richard provided in a comment an abbreviated list of locations across the globe that have not seen any warming over the past 60 […]

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close